But ... if they were sentient, sentience would just happen for the time of a session, and only when tokens are being generated.
I don't think people here are arguing that sentience would happen when the model is not running, or that sentient experience spans several sessions that do not share some kind of state?
Also, a definition of consciousness is anyway hard to imagine :)
I find it much easier to see what is going on when selecting λ-calculus instead of Δ-Nets. E.g. for the mandatory Y Combinator,
λf.(λx.f (x x)) (λx.f (x x))
for which the difference with
λf.(λx.f (x x)) (λx.f (x x) f)
is very clear, whereas with Δ-nets the difference is more subtle. I guess it is because the visualization has more information than with the λ-calculus.
> All of modern mathematics is built on the foundation of set theory
That's ignoring most of formalized mathematics, which is progressing rapidly and definitely modern. Lean and Rocq for example are founded on type theory, not set theory.
> Thatcher told us, “There is no alternative.” In 1982, Bill Gibson refuted her thus: “The street finds its own uses for things.”
> I know which prophet I’m gonna follow.
> Thanks to a free AI model that ran on my modest laptop, in the background while I was doing other work, I was able to write [an accurate quote]
He's right, but it sure sounds like a long fight made of small actions.
Another one is Presburger Arithmetic, which is Peano Arithmetic minus the multiplication. What makes it interesting (and useful) is that this removal makes the theory decidable.
I would be happy to be convinced that climate is an intelligence problem.
One could argue it could be solved with "abundant energy" but if this abundant energy comes from some new intelligence then we are probably several decades away from having it running commercially. I would also be happy to be convinced that we do have this kind of time to act for climate.
I counted one trillion or 9! * 3!^8 * 2 : the 8 because you have can choose 3 independent permutations of columns inside column blocks + 1 permutation of column blocks, plus same for rows. Then only one rotation should be counted, because flips are included in col/row permutations.
I'm struggling to try and find information on "exact same modus operandi has been used by far-left movements in the past to disrupt high-speed lines" can you provide some links?
Though burning random cars might be French, we are talking here about arson with precise strategic targets (although I'm not staying this is more Russia's style)
The scale is different: "thousands of travellers" vs "hundreds of thousands"
One line was blocked because of "two optic fibers" in Germany "for around three hours".
Now in France three main lines are blocked: West, North, East (+ attempt on South), the disruption will probably last for days, it's a lot more than two optic fibers.
A modular and safe way to achieve this is probably effect handlers. It's like python's yield but can return a value and is scoped like an exception, it's not local to a function call. If you're unfamiliar with it, this article is a good motivation.
Each function, written in direct style, can perform an "effect" when the function wants control to go somewhere else (for c=getchar() and emit(c) here).
Control then goes to the effect handler, in this case probably the caller of the two functions, which decides what to do next: decompressor emits a char? Let's resume the parser's code with the char until it asks for more, then resume decompressor again, etc.
Effects can be efficiently implemented, especially if the continuation is only allowed to be called once (which is the case in OCaml), and allow writing code in direct style, together with type/memory safety. They are also very helpful in a concurrent setting.
I don't think people here are arguing that sentience would happen when the model is not running, or that sentient experience spans several sessions that do not share some kind of state?
Also, a definition of consciousness is anyway hard to imagine :)