frozenspinach @ frozenspinach @lemmy.ml

Posts

1

Comments

130

Joined

9 mo. ago

How much of that do you think is inherent intelligence and how much is nurture?

I want to get there, but I want to stick with my question for a second. Do you think "humans are smarter than crows" necessarily involves conflations around ability and intelligence? Because I don't think that's the case at all.

I think we can be respectful of these nuances about how we understand intelligence and still not treat them like they imply superior intelligence to humans.

If I say "humans are more intelligent than crows" and your impulse is to respond by emphasizing the dynamic nature of animal intelligence as if that's not already accounted for, that's what I mean by Crow Quicksand.

I think I would agree with this.

Don’t mistake inability with lack of intelligence.

Do you think that that's what's going on when someone says that humans are more intelligent than crows?

This is what's so puzzling to me. I could spend paragraph after paragraph saying, crows have adapted to a specific niche, that they demonstrate their intelligence in unique ways. That human problem solving has benefited from a specific evolutionary history that's involved fine motor manipulation and vocalization and social hierarchies and intergenerational sharing of knowledge. I could say things about how the development of specific forms of intelligence is in response to evolutionary pressures rather than the specific intentional choice; that the intelligence we see is intelligence as applied to specific domains. I can say that the apex of complex demonstrations of human intelligence, whether it's via the coordination and scientific understanding and planning necessary for great feats of engineering, the depth of social and emotional sensitivity demonstrated by the greatest of human poets or social and political thinkers, etc etc are not things that should be credited to your average Joe. I can talk in romanticized wonder about the beauty of the animal world.

I can wade into that process of making caveats and appreciations and so on and still come out the other side not having lost sight of the fact that humans are indeed more intelligent than crows.

But some people wade into that same vortex of humility, and apparently become hypnotized and never recover. I almost want to call it the Crow Quicksand.

This is what I mean about that seductive vortex of intellectual humility causing us to lose sight of the big picture.

I'm not sure I agree that we have no such thing as a common understanding of intelligence nor that we should view the kind of intelligence we're familiar with in humans as distinctly belonging to humans, such that it's just a matter of not being able to decode or decipher other forms of intelligence.

I also think it can be pretty clear when we can see demonstrations of, say, deployed sophistication in engineering capacity, such as what people seem to think they're observing with extreme capabilities of alien spacecrafts executing impossible right angle turns or other such things. (whether those videos are true or not). And not everything is like that surely, but clearly we can imagine what it's like to conceive of intelligences better or worse than our own, at least with specific enough examples targeted on just illustrating that particular point, which demonstrates an important principle that these things are discernible in at least some cases.

I do think it's very true that we have to be careful in the assumptions we make about intelligence because the way an octopus is intelligence is indeed different from the way a predator in the savannah is different and similar.

But I think it's getting a little too lost in the sauce to think that it means we can't understand what it would be like for there to be a demonstration of distinctly advanced intelligences, and for that matter, the very project of appreciating animal intelligence absolutely culminates in the takeaway of appreciating the special and unique intelligence of certain animals like dolphins or crows, or elephants. The very process of being careful in assessing and understanding the intelligence of other creatures sometimes absolutely does involve us selecting out ones that seem to stand above and beyond.

However much is true of the differences of intelligence to domain specificity, the cumulative forms of intelligence and the depth of it that humans are capable of demonstrating eclipses such questions.

That's insane. And it seems perhaps like an ugly case of integration gone wrong. Are you able to Use the website and add a bookmark to the website onto your phone's home screen or something?

That might bypass any app-based logins.

Apparently it's feeling the Lemmy hug of death: https://archive.is/Z9Udy

It also took me a second but I got there

That is the only reason here.

That's not a bad thing though. It means their profitability is aligned with preferences of their customers rather than a kind of "managed dissatisfaction" business model.

Commentators here seem to be missing the main point - Trump is simply responding positively to Zelensky’s offer.

I'm not sure I understand why you think that's the 'main' point, it sounds like you mean this was all at Ukraine's initiative. But I think the real story is that it has traction because, well, you need two sides to make a deal, and the game changer is Trump's affirmative interest, which escalates this from offer to mutual interest.

I love that this counts as totalitarian from their perspective (but nothing else)

The truth is out now.

What truth? Who talks like this and thinks it means something?

at this point, I think people have mined the prompt itself?

Would be interested in any additional info on this.

Nothing alleged about it. The main app wraps your prompt in a China-friendly one

I asked it about whether the takeover of Hong Kong was met with international criticism. First I saw an answer saying yes, and a few paragraphs of examples and elaborations.

A few minutes later the answer I already saw was replaced with "sorry, that's outside of my scope." I think with the flood of new traffic to Deepseek, they are scaling up reviews of chat content.

Realistically what is the worst thing China is doing with your private data?

Probably mapping out the extended support networks of democratic activists in Taiwan to prepare to throw them in jail after a forcible military takeover.

but it’s a foreign actor so OOooooOOWwwwooOOOO sCaRrRey!

I love that people think this is a solid own. Lest we forget Hong Kong, or an impending hot war in Taiwan or building out extradition systems with an expanding network of countries to forcibly repatriate and torture dissidents and human rights lawyers.

You used to not have to explain why authoritarianism was bad.

Edit: I would love to know the Pro side of what happened in Hong Kong, or the forced extradition regime, since evidently I'm clearly in the wrong in thinking those were bad. What am I missing?

They all store data on Chinese servers?

Never thought I would see a version of "all lives matter" but applied to web browsers

Daily reminder that Brave uses Chromium, an open source project where all the commits are approved or denied by Google devs.

I think it's a good special case thing but I don't think you're intended to host tons of stuff there as a primary account

I think the only thing you can trust is software architecture - things like E2E encryption, zero knowledge architecture, auditable code etc.