Have to agree with all the scepticism. Even if this does work, it's just going to end up being used as an excuse to allow continued pollution rather than the clean up measure it should be.
It's a stupid game to play, and should not be considered our long term strategy... then again, right now the long term strategy seems to be kicking the can down the road, so this might be better than nothing.
Yeah. When you really think about it, Europe really did start on easy mode in that regard. Continent was chock full of good quality, easily accessible ore of all kinds.
Meanwhile, Japan had to fight tooth and nail just to get any workable metal. If I remember correctly, most of their "ore" was from iron-rich sand.
As they say, necessity is the mother of all invention. If you need extremely high quality craftsmen just to make a half-decent weapon, that's what you'll get (as long as money is no object).
Exactly. Their swords had to be well-honed simply because they would break otherwise, because the ore they were using was absolute shite.
These weren't God slaying weapons, heck even after all that labour, they'd still struggle against just about any slash resistant armour. Basically any swordsmith from a country with actually decent ore could trounce these swords with ease.
Exactly. It's not like this is an existential threat to human civilisation and the current ecosystem of the planet... oh wait, that's exactly what it bloody is!
The reason for all the apathetic people is because they see the writing on the wall. It's not too late now, but by the time the assholes up top actually pull their heads out, it will be.
People aren't apathetic because "it's too late", it's because rightnowis the time humanity needs to act, yet all that's really happened is governments making promises to act in 10, 15, 20 years time if at all.
Oh, but there are pollution targets... that are routinely unmet, or are met through dodgy use of carbon credits, all with no punishment.
I don't think I'd want to shake the hand of someone whose people are illegally pillaging and destroying my homeland either. I'd sooner rather spit on it.
My gripe with the Chinese room is that Searle argues that his inability to understand Chinese means the program doesn't understand Chinese, but I could say the same thing about the human body.
The neurons that operate your vocal chords have no idea what they're saying, nor the ones in your hands any idea what they're writing, yet they can speak and write exactly because your brain tells them what to do. Your brain is exactly like that book as far as your mouth and hand neurons are concerned.
They don't need to understand language at all for your brain to be able to understand it and give instructions based on that understanding.
My only argument is at what point does an algorithm become sufficiently advanced that it is indistinguishable from a conscious being?
Because at the end of the day, most of what a brain does is information processing based on what it has previously learnt, and that's exactly what the algorithm is doing based on training data. A sufficient enough algorithm should surely be able to replicate understanding.
Sure, that isn't ChatGPT as we know it, as you can tell from its sometimes very zany responses that while it understands what words are valid responses, it doesn't understand what the words themselves mean, but we should reach that at some point, no?
Outside of subjects they are interested in, learning about anything can be quite boring. Even if it's a necessity, it's obvious why a child ends up being distracted by an object essentially designed to be their interest.
The problem with banning these devices in classrooms is that unless you enforce it in any meaningful way, it ends up just being a game of hide and seek with minimal consequences to them (short term at least).
UNESCO calling students to stop using their phones is even less effective than the teachers themselves trying to do it, and we already know how that turns out.
I'm genuinely not sure I would have made it through my degree without the accessibility to research papers provided by Sci-Hub. I'm so glad Alexandra is getting the recognition she deserves for her incredibly important but thankless work!
Sceptical because "revolutionary" discoveries like this always end up either being bogus or have some massive caveat that makes them effectively useless outside of very specific scenarios.
Thought I will be pleasantly surprised if proven wrong
Is that ADHD with Autism included haha