frightful_hobgoblin @ frightful_hobgoblin @lemmy.ml

Posts

52

Comments

881

Joined

2 yr. ago

https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/66705/the-future-of-oncology-digital-twins-and-precision-cancer-care

https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/66585/artificial-intelligence-based-multimodal-imaging-and-multi-omics-in-medical-research

https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/65016/deep-learning-for-industrial-applications

etc.: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/artificial-intelligence/research-topics

https://www.nature.com/articles/s42256-024-00883-x

https://www.nature.com/articles/s42256-024-00882-y

https://engineering.princeton.edu/news/2024/02/21/engineers-use-ai-wrangle-fusion-power-grid

But it's inherently impossible to "show" anything except inputs&outputs (including for a biological system).

What are you using the word "real" to mean, and is it aloof from the measurable behaviour of the system?

You seem to be using a mental model that there's

• A: the measurable inputs & outputs of the system
• B: the "real understanding", which is separate

How can you prove B exists if it's not measurable? You say there is an "onus" to do so. I don't agree that such an onus exists.

This is exactly the Chinese Room paper. 'Understand' is usually understood in a functionalist way.

Here is the latest edition of Nature Machine Intelligence, to give you a basic idea of the sort of research that constitutes the AI field: https://www.nature.com/natmachintell/current-issue

Topics in Frontiers In Artificial Intelligence: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/artificial-intelligence/research-topics

Foundations and Trends in Machine Learning: https://www.nowpublishers.com/MAL

huh?

Yes. I mean, this is absolute basics.

Nuclear fusion

The fusion ones for example

No. You want to suddenly change the subject to language models?

You don't?

Fusion's close to a core need of humanity.

They don’t understand though. A lot of AI evangelists seem to smooth over that detail, it is a LLM not anything that “understands” language, video nor images.

We're into the Chinese Room problem. "Understand" is not a well-defined or measurable thing. I don't see how it could be measured except from looking at inputs&outputs.

What have you read or where did you get your understanding from?

Ok but socdem. And before you try to make a counter argument with [insert nordic country that is actually capitalist] just think about how they always call the ussr and china communist while they arent.

What are you trying to say?

You're against computers being able to understand language, video, and images?

That's my point. It's all about doing self-interested things like mutual aid. Mutual defense is in my self-interest. A dairy co-operative is in the farmers' interest. Zebras move in herds because it is in their mutual self-interest.

The initial comment is saying communism is about self-sacrifice, against human nature. Kropotkin (I've read the book three times btw) convincing makes the case that it's the opposite of self-sacrifice: about pursuing our natural mutual interest according to our evolutionary imperatives. Kropotkin would say that ruthless competition is against our evolutionary nature and imperatives because it disadvantages survival.

the initial argument only applies to Utopian Socialism anyway – fighting for your personal interest is exactly the point of communism, destroying all the enemies of the working class

And that I’m expected to devote all of my time and energy and effort to it just to prove it. The least I can do and have done anymore, is whenever an issue involving women comes up and someone is attempting to shut them down, I’ll speak my mind of it.

You've stated your own problem here. Trying to please moralistic people is a no-win game. Instead, be practical.

Yeah but it won't taste the way it used to

Yes, July the 19th was a sad day

I had never mentioned myself in the post.

You didn't have to.