cecinestpasunbot

joined 2 years ago
[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml -1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

You’re betraying your ignorance of how biology works and illustrating that you have absolutely no business debating this subject.

Have some humility and willingness to learn.

Efficiency is not the primary fitness function for evolution, it’s survivability.

I didn’t say it was the primary function. I guess all that talk about straw men was just projection. You don’t trust me, fine. Then what about Darwin who literally said, “Natural selection is continually trying to economize every part of the organization.” Now please go and read some introductory texts on biology before trying to explain to me why Darwin is wrong. There’s so much going on when it comes to the thermodynamics of living systems and you’re clearly not ready to have a conversation about it.

Here’s a concrete example for you of just how much of the brain isn’t actually essential for normal day to day function.

You’re baseless assuming that hydrocephalus causes the brain to lose a substantial amount of its complexity. Where is the evidence for that? In most of these cases it seems much of the outer layers of the cerebral cortex are in tact. It’s also really telling that your citation’s first source is an article titled “Is Your Brain Really Necessary” which is followed in the Journal by another article entitled “Math and Sex: Are Girls Born with Less Ability?”. But hey neuroscience hasn’t really advanced at all since 1980 right? The brain is totally redundant right? There’s no possible way a critical and discerning person such as yourself could have been taken in by junk science, right?!!

That’s literally the whole context for this thread, it just doesn’t fit with the straw man you want to argue about.

I took issue with specific statements you made that stand apart from the rest of your comment. That’s not a straw man. Although honestly this is on me. What can I expect from someone who thinks LLMs and the Human Brain are operating on similar principles? You’re so wound up in a pseudoscientific fiction there’s nothing I can do. You might as well start believing in the astrology, crystals, and energy healing. At least those interests will make you seem fun and quirky instead of just an over confident tech bro.

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml -2 points 4 days ago (3 children)

The straw man is you continuing to argue against equating LLMs with the functioning of the brain, something I never said here.

I’m not claiming you ever said they functioned exactly the same way. Im simply stating that you’re way off base when you claim that they appear to operate using the same principles or that all evidence suggests the human mind is nothing more than a probability machine. That’s not a straw man. You literally said those things.

There is zero evidence that all the complexity of the brain is inherent to the way our reasoning functions.

You’re betraying your own ignorance about neuroscience. The complexity of the brain is absolutely linked with its ability to reason and we have plenty of evidence to show that. The evolutionary process does not just create needless complexity if there is a more efficient path.

Again, we don’t have a full understanding of how the brain accomplishes tasks like reasoning. It may be a lot more complex than what LLMs do, or it may not be. We do not know.

This is such a silly statement especially when you’ve been claiming that both the brain and AI appear to work using the same principles. If you truly believe the mind is such a mystery then stop making that claim.

You decided to ignore that to focus on braying about tech companies and LLMs instead.

I don’t really care about your arguments concerning embodiment because they’re so beside the point when you just blowing right by the most basic principles of neuroscience.

I bring up tech companies because they’ve had a massively distorting effect on how many computer scientists think the world works. You’re not immune to it either simply because you’re a critic of capitalism. A ruthless criticism of that exists includes the very researchers whose work you’re taking at face value.

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 days ago (5 children)

our brains appear to work on similar principles.

Sure in the same way that a horse and a motorcycle operate on similar principles and serve the same function.

Maybe try engaging with that instead of writing a wall of text arguing with a straw man.

Where the straw man? You’ve missed my point entirely. LLMs and the human mind operate on categorically different principles. All the verbiage used to describe neural network models has little to do with how the brain actually works. That’s honestly wasn’t a problem until Tech companies started purposely misusing those terms and now far too many people seem to think “AI” is something it’s not.

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 0 points 5 days ago (7 children)

All the evidence suggests that our own minds are also nothing more than probability engines.

This completely understates the gulf between what we call AI and how the human brain actually works. The difference is so severe that acting as if they’re quantitatively comparable is basically pseudoscience. You might as well start claiming that we’re not far off from building a Dyson sphere just because we invented solar panels.

Most “AI” these days are built using linear feed forward networks. The brain is constructed using nonlinear recurrent networks which are can do far more with less. Now you could theoretically create the same output from a linear feed forward network but it’s way less efficient and would require many more neurons to achieve such a result. Which is wild when you consider that there are orders of magnitude more synapses in just the regions of the brain associated with language than there are parameters used in even today’s most advanced “AI” models. Now consider that human synapses rely on over a hundred qualitatively different neurotransmitters and not just a single 16-bit number. It’s also not just the scale of the signal that transmits information in a human synapse but the pattern too. Would you be surprised to know that there are a whole variety of signaling patterns neurons use? Because that’s true too. I haven’t even gotten into the differences in complexity in terms of how neurons process the information they receive. As of now there is no “AI” system that comes anywhere close to replicating that kind of complexity. It’s absurd to suggest where dealing with qualitatively similar machines here.

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 week ago

The squad was born in the original Trump administration so it shouldn't be that surprising to see a return of these kinds of progressive candidates.

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 54 points 1 week ago

WhyTF do we even have primaries then! If they are not going to play by their own rules of their special little club, let’s just extend Ranked Choice Voting to cover the general and scrap the primaries altogether!

Because the US doesn't really have a true democracy. It's always going to be weighted against the actual interests of the people. The more success candidates the Zohran have, the more the established politicians will stack the deck against them. The good thing is that the more the game is rigged the more obvious it all becomes.

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago

That would be nice except as it stands Americans are getting pushed out into the pacific to drown. The balance of power between working people and wealthy elites has to shift before any meaningful progress is possible.

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 55 points 1 week ago

Kind of telling to be complaining about this on a day which celebrates the end of slavery.

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Why not? Based on Iran’s history, I think it’s highly improbably they would use nukes offensively. They have every reason to want to develop a nuke. It’s likely that they even have the capacity to make one. Even then, they’ve refused to. All evidence points to the fact that they genuinely want peace. All of their responses to either American or Israeli attacks have been very limited. Even their allies all seem primarily interested in self defense.

While the government may not be to your liking, having nukes is not going to prevent organic resistance. In fact, having a real deterrent against foreign military intervention ensures that the people of Iran can focus on fighting for their personal freedoms and not their very lives. In the past there have been real protest movements in favor of social reform. Now though? Iranians are demonstrating in defiance of Israel and in support of the Iranian state.

To be clear, I’m not exactly a fan of nuclear proliferation. However, in a world where the only country to ever use nukes as a weapon and their genocidal proxy are aiming to obliterate your country, having a nuclear deterrent makes everyone safer.

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

This is why I think China’s bet on renewable energy technology, manufacturing, and infrastructure is going to be a major geopolitical advantage for them in the coming years. You can’t conceivably cut China off from the sun, wind, and rain. Their major weakness is still going to be a naval blockade that could cut them off from access to raw materials. However, they’re also addressing that issue as well through various sustainability initiatives and military capacity.

The US however is playing the same old game of trying to control the world’s fossil fuel supply. However, they’ve done nothing to hedge against the inevitability that renewable energy will devalue fossil fuels almost entirely. They’re structurally incapable of doing anything else and it’s going to bite them in the ass.

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

It could be the business was borderline insolvent and cash from the checks acted as a short term loan from Walmart.

That or he was trying to create the create the illusion of cash flow in order to get the business to qualify for certain kinds of loans. The money from the loans he could subsequently embezzled. Then if the company went bankrupt the creditors would be at a loss.

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If you end up integrating LLMs in a way where it could impact patient care that’s actually pretty dangerous considering their training data includes plenty of fictional and pseudo scientific sources. That said it might be okay for medical research applications where accuracy isn’t as critical.

view more: next ›