> This was their third office space, serving as their headquarters before they outgrew it and eventually relocated to Market Square at 1355 Market Street in 2012. The arab spring twitter uprising was fully a CIA/NSA operation.
To be clear, the claim you're making is that because Twitter has their third corporate office in the same building as an AT&T switching center, and US intelligence used a room in AT&T's switching center for surveillance, then Twitter must have been controlled by US intelligence? And thus the Arab Spring uprising, where Twitter was used, was "fully a CIA/NSA operation"?
For what it's worth, this sounds a lot like something downstream from "reward hacking" in ML- in training, passing tests is often sufficient, and thus gets trained for. There are attempts to fix this (e.g. trying to detect such "cheating" and penalize it), but they have their own problems.
> The difference is that when a human reasoner goes to solve a problem, they'll think "this kind of proof usually goes this way" - following an explicit rule enforcement.
How is this different from "probabilistic pattern selection"?
Hm, it sounds like to you consciousness implies non-determinism, and so determinism implies a lack of consciousness - is that right? If so, why do you think so? And if not, what am I missing?
(If you've engaged w/ the literature here, it's quite hard to give a confident "yes". it's also quite hard to give a confident "no"! so then what the heck do we do)
I also can't help but note that this blog post itself seems (first to my own intuition and heuristics, but also to both Pangram and GPTZero) to be clearly LLM-generated text.
I think your pitch would be significantly stronger if the resources you linked didn't largely revolve around "What if Snoop Dogg had his own currency?"
I'm not ... completely unable to be persuaded that there are use cases for cryptocurrency. But "Ashton Kutcher should have Aston Kutchercoin, and develop some sort of referral-based pyramid-shaped scheme with it for his fans" is... what is that?
> IGN has accused the game developer for being sexist (based on some poorly translated social media posts) and gave it a low score before properly playing/testing it.
What score did they give it? Because I just checked and they seem to have awarded it an 8 out of 10. I don't follow game reviews, but surely review inflation hasn't gotten so bad that people are on some sort of anti-"woke" bent over an 8 out of 10?
I figured "well maybe they changed it after publication, those sneaky skags", so looked at the ol' Wayback Machine capture for Aug 16th, four days before launch, when the review embargo lifted: https://web.archive.org/web/20240816141422/https://www.ign.c...
8/10 there too- "Despite some frustrating technical issues, Black Myth: Wukong is a great action game with fantastic combat, exciting bosses, tantalizing secrets, and a beautiful world.". Really a horrible thing these journalists have done, ripping into the game like that.
Now, I did also find a report from IGN about 6 months ago that some people claim used "mistranslated quotes". But I don't speak Chinese, and the people online who I've found yelling at IGN about this appear to have used ChatGPT or Google Translate to translate things themselves! So- do you speak Chinese? If not, how do you know the claims of "mistranslation" are correct (again, for a thing that is not a review)?
" by the same people that believe whatever they're told by anyone in authority, and then feel the urge to pass it on to others without critical thought."
respectfully, what the hell is this bit doing in your post?
In fact, humans will be running at relativistic speeds within this century, risking the total destruction of the Earth if they should ever trip over something and fall down.
Scary stuff. And it's not science fiction- it's based on real, observed trends and scaling laws. Seems impossible? Well, they said the four-minute mile was impossible, too.
Absolutely agree. When I was a kid, I took a MOOC (MITx 6.002x) because I was interested in EE. They said calculus was a prerequisite, which I didn't know yet, but I went ahead anyways; every time the course required calculus, I'd go read the relevant chapters in Strang's Calculus. Felt incredibly natural, and I ended up going through the rest of Strang just for fun- probably the best learning experience I've ever had, and I doubt I'd have ever done it without having the MOOC there to motivate the problem.