DahGangalang @ DahGangalang @infosec.pub

Posts

1

Comments

398

Joined

2 yr. ago

Not at all impressive, but to maximize interactions on a newborn thread:

It's probably my PS3, which I would have gotten Christmas 2008 (or maybe it was 2009?). I recently started sailining the seas, and the most convenient way to watch those videos is to burn them to a disk, and so the PS3 is really just a glorified DVD player (can't even be bothered to use it's blue ray functionality)

This attempted contradiction doesn't seem to counteract the above comment.

I think there's something to be said about shared cultural experiences, and so reading some older books is probably a good thing.

To clarify what I mean though: that means that we should be reading stuff that was written/popular when our grandparents were our age. Going back 200+ years should be saved for a history class cause that's the real value in reading that material. In my opinion, Great Gatsby should be about the oldest book kids need to be reading for a literature class these days, and even that's pushing it.

Yeah and I'll bet you use Tau instead of Pi, don't you, you human scum.

I'm surprised at the amount of disagreement your comment is getting.

I don't want to downplay Jackson's displacement of American Indians, but there was one real FUBAR thing Jackson did that no one remembers:

He paid off the national debt.

Completely and entirely. The federal government existed debt free for some months (I forget exactly how long, I want to say it was a year or so before borrowing exceeded income).

On the face of it, this probably sounds like a good thing, but it hard crashed the economy. Obv wasn't alive at the time, but it's my understanding that it was the worst economic disaster until the Great Depression (and The Great Depression was only worse because the country and world were far more connected than the world of Jackson's day).

That said, I hear inauguration party was a real rager.

Liquor Bottle by Herbal T. Has a nice faux-upbeat rhythm with jazzy kinda beats, but lyrics.are dark. Definitely helps me keep a sane face on the dark days:

And that's why / I keep a

A liquor bottle in the freezer ♪

In case I gotta take it out ♫

Mix me a drink

To help me

Forget all the things

In my life that I worry about ♪ ♫

pain receptors are distinct receptors in your body that don't dull themselves after a while

Man, that's some bullshit.

Come on Body, can't you just have some, like, nice things that aren't purely functional?

I've got a grandpa who says this all the time. He was a technician on a bunch of government contracts all through the cold war.

"No matter how much you try or how well you succeed in digitizing things, we still live in an analog world"

I had (what felt like) an epiphany (but has seemed obvious to everyone I've shared it with) some time ago:

Electrical signals are serial; they're connectionless, like UDP.

Underlying all these fantastic technologies is just aother connectionless protocol.

Ugh, yeah, I don't hate the guy, but I also think that anyone who still thinks he's a visionary hasn't actually been paying attention to his work/how his companies are going lately.

I suppose my instinctive reaction isn't to assume someone's politics would determine how they react to Musk.

My first real assumption would be that tech/engineering types are the only ones who'd really think about him at all (in both directions). Like, I do have an uncle who occasionally brings him up whenever theirs news on SpaceX's rockets (though usually this gets brought up in the context of "new technology sucks" and "what was wrong with the rockets that carried up Voyager" and such).

So yeah, I really don't think I'd describe anyone as "gargling Elon's cock" except those who still have good will for Tesla.

Yeah, I hate how toxic just politics in general get. Like, it feels like any time anything political gets brought up, everyone leaves their good will and sense of humanity at the door, ya know?

I do enjoy how much tech-focused content is on Lemmy, but it also feels like there's a higher concentration of toxic leftist type posts.

That's definitely a thing I miss about the good ol' reddit days: being able to scroll for days without seeing anything political. Or rather - being able to filter out all the political subs and not feeling like you were missing out on the larger conversation on the platform.

That's interesting to hear. I wouldn't have expected Europeans would have thought about ol' Elon that much.

Ugh, yeah, that is a point of frustration I have with the family.

For them, it's not so much "look what Musk is doing" so much as "look at how much better Twitter's gotten", which is particularly ripe cause none of them even use the platform. As I think on it, that probably means the big Fox talking heads are saying things like that.

I never got into Twitter myself (just never really understood / took to the format), which is kind of a shame cause I'd really like to be supporting Mastodon in this years surgance of the Fediverse.

Right.

I don't mean to say that the mechanism by which human brains learn and the mechanism by which AI is trained are 1:1 directly comparable.

I do mean to say that the process looks pretty similar.

My knee jerk reaction is to analogize it as comparing a fish swimming to a bird flying. Sure there are some important distinctions (e.g. bird's need to generate lift while fish can rely on buoyancy) but in general, the two do look pretty similar (i.e. they both take a fluid medium and push it to generate thrust).

And so with that, it feels fair to say that learning, that the storage and retrieval of memories/experiences, and that the way that that stored information shapes our sub-concious (and probably conscious too) reactions to the world around us seems largely comparable to the processes that underlie the training of "AI" and LLMs.

Man, I don't know what right wingers y'all are talking about.

I come from a super right wing family and all them MFs think this is a bad idea too (though to be fair, they're def on the conspiracy theory "everything is to get a microchip in my blood/brain" side of things).

Thats not what I intended to communicate.

I feel the Turing machine portion is not particularly relevant to the larger point. Not to belabor the point, but to be as clear as I can be: I don't think nor intend to communicate that humans operate in the same way as a computer; I don't mean to say that we have a CPU that handles instructions in a (more or less) one at a time fashion with specific arguments that determine flow of data as a computer would do with Assembly Instructions. I agree that anyone arguing human brains work like that are missing a lot in both neuroscience and computer science.

The part I mean to focus on is the models of how AIs learn, specifically in neutral networks. There might be some merit in likening a cell to a transistor/switch/logic gate for some analogies, but for the purposes of talking about AI, I think comparing a brain cell to a node in a neutral network is most useful.

The individual nodes in neutral network will have minimal impact on converting input to output, yet each one does influence the processing of one to the other. Iand with the way we train AI, how each node tweaks the result will depend solely on the past I put that has been given to it.

In the same way, when met with a situation, our brains will process information in a comparable way: that is, any given input will be processed by a practically uncountable amount of neurons, each influencing our reactions (emotional, physical, chemical, etc) in miniscule ways based on how our past experiences have "treated" those individual neurons.

In that way, I would argue that the processes by which AI are trained and operated are comparable to that of the human mind, though they do seem to lack complexity.

Ninjaedit: I should proofread my post before submitting it.

But feal there maey be a does of misspelt words in your setnence thoungh

So I love that this meme is detailed enough to have the older guy's arm partially block his name tag.

...but I'm disappointed that, in spite of such details elsewhere, there's a misspelt word.

The dichotomy is making my bones itch.

Yes? I think that depends on your specific definition and requirements of a turing machine, but I think it's fair to compare the almagomation of cells that is me to the "AI" LLM programs of today.

While I do think that the complexity of input, output, and "memory" of LLM AI's is limited in current iterations (and thus makes it feel like a far comparison to "human" intelligence), I do think the underlying process is fundamentally comparable.

The things that make me "intelligent" are just a robust set of memories, lessons, and habits that allow me to assimilate new information and experiences in a way that makes sense to (most of) the people around me. (This is abstracting away that this process is largely governed by chemical reactions, but considering consciousness appears to be just a particularly complicated chemistry problem reinforces the point I'm trying to make, I think).