31–40 of 313 posts
https://d1gesto.blogspot.com/2024/12/why-ai-models-cant-achi...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there a reason you phrased the question that way, instead of just asking whether it was written by AI?
It's just that I have the feeling that people avoid using the actual em-dash in fear of being accused that the text is ai generated. (Which isnt a valid indicator anyway) Maybe its just my perception that i notice this more since LLMs became popular.
but what youd see in your browser was “square blocks”
so i just ran output through some strings/awk /sed (server side) to clean up certain characters, that i now know specifying “ utf-8 “ encoding fixes altogether.
TLDR: the “problem” was “lets use wordpress as a CMS and composer, but spit it out in the same format as its predecessor software and keep generating static content that uses the design we already have”
em-dashes needed to be double dashes due to a longstanding oversight.
The Original Sin was Newsmaker, which had a proprietary format that didnt work in anything else and needed some perl magic to spit out plaintext.
I don’t work in that environment or even that industry anymore but took the hacky methodology my then-boss and I came up with together.
SO,
1) i still have a script that gets rid of them when publishing, even though its no longer necessary. and its been doing THAT longer than “LLMs” were mainstream.
and 2) now that people ask “did AI write this?” i still continue with a long standing habit of getting rid of them when manually composing something.
Funny story though after twenty years of just adding more and more post processing kludge. I finally screamed AAAAAAAAHAHHHH WHY DOES THIS PAGE STILL HAVE SQUARE BLOCKS ALL OVER IT at “Grok.”
All that kludge and post processing solved by adding utf-8 encoding in the , which an “Ai” helpfully pointed out in about 0.0006s.
That was about two weeks ago. Not sure when I’ll finally just let my phone or computer insert one for me. Probably never. But thats it. I don’t hate the em-dash. I hate square blocks!
Absolutely nothing against AI. I had a good LONG recovery period where I could not sit there and read 40-100 page paper or a manual anymore, and i wasnt much better at composing my own thoughts. so I have a respect for its utility and I fully made use of that for a solid two years.
And it just fixed something that id overlooked because, well, im infrastructure. im not a good web designer.
Let’s make an ironman assumption: maybe consciousness could arise entirely within a textual universe. No embodiment, no sensors, no physical grounding. Just patterns, symbols, and feedback loops inside a linguistic world. If that’s possible in principle, what would it look like? What would it require? The missing variable in most debates is environmental coherence. Any conscious agent, textual or physical, has to inh…
From my perspective, the disconnect you describe is one of the main reasons this term cannot be applied.
Another reason is that the argument for calling LLMs conscious arises from the perspective of thinking and reasoning grounded in language.
But in my personal experience, thinking in language is just a small emerging quality of human consciousness. It is just that the intellectuals making these arguments happen to be fully identified with the “I think therefore I am” aspect of it and not the vastness of the rest.
I'll never ask if AI is conscious because I already know they are not. Consciousness must involve an interplay with the senses. It is naive to think we can achieve AGI by making Platonic machines ever more rational. https://d1gesto.blogspot.com/2024/12/why-ai-models-cant-achi...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>After encountering his participation in https://ai-2027.com/ I am not interested in hearing his opinions about AI. I'm not familiar with ai-2027 -- could you elaborate about why it would be distasteful to participate in this?
It is an attempt to predict a possible future in the context of AI. Basically a doomer fairy tale. It is just phenomenally dumb. Way worse than the worst bad scifi about the subject. It is presented as a cautionary tale and purports to be somewhat rationally thought out. But it is just so bad. It tries to delve into foreign policy and international politics but does so in such a naive way that it is painful to read.…
Not any actual refutation. Maybe this opinion is a bit tougher to stomach for some reason than the rest you agree with...
I'll never ask if AI is conscious because I already know they are not. Consciousness must involve an interplay with the senses. It is naive to think we can achieve AGI by making Platonic machines ever more rational. https://d1gesto.blogspot.com/2024/12/why-ai-models-cant-achi...
an idea debated in philosophy for centuries, if not millenia, without consensus.
Maybe be a little more willing to be wrong about such matters?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is that any different from the utter mess of a world humans find themselves existing in?
We can form and test hypotheses and experience the consequences. And then take that knowledge to our next trial. Even dogs and cats do this on a daily basis. Without that, how would we even evaluate whether something is conscious?
Let’s make an ironman assumption: maybe consciousness could arise entirely within a textual universe. No embodiment, no sensors, no physical grounding. Just patterns, symbols, and feedback loops inside a linguistic world. If that’s possible in principle, what would it look like? What would it require? The missing variable in most debates is environmental coherence. Any conscious agent, textual or physical, has to inh…
Regardless, I think people tend to take consciousness a bit too seriously and my intuition is consciousness is going to have a similar fate to the heliocentric model of the universe. In other words, we'll discover that consciousness isn't really "special" just like we found out that the earth is just another planet among trillions and trillions.