Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bullshit About Bullshit Machines [pdf]

aphyr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 53 posts

Re: Bullshit About Bullshit Machines [pdf]

#31

Post by throwanem »

deltarholamda wrote: post #26
dwroberts wrote: post #12

Can we stop putting this site on the front page if it has geoblocking for certain locations? Or at least require an archive link with it?

It also blocks IPs from states with age verification laws. I mean, okay, I respect the principle, but since there's very little I can do about the laws, and since there are exactly zero politicians who are going to fret because they can't visit aphyr dot com, it's a bit pretentious. So I guess I'll just k-line all aphyr dot com links in my filter and move on with my life. Everybody blocking everybody is how we win.

The sooner, the better. The more quietly, too.

Re: Bullshit About Bullshit Machines [pdf]

#32

Post by [deleted] »

gib444 wrote: post #27
estimator7292 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blame your own government for trying to levy fines on non-citizens anywhere on the entire damn planet without explaining or justifying itself. Kyle has spent a lot of time and resources trying to talk to OFCOM. They won't give answers, so the only reasonable option is to block the UK. Which is the entire point of your laws. Blame yourself.

Going to Uno Reverse that back to you - the current edition of "think of the children" is from organisations in the US pushing their agenda all over Get your own house in order (if you're from the US), and ironically, keep your nonsense within your own borders....

[deleted]

Re: Bullshit About Bullshit Machines [pdf]

#33

Post by RegW »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #23
estimator7292 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what the UK government wants. Kyle has spent an insane amount of effort to get answers from OFCOM, got none, and as such blocks the UK for self-preservation. The UK wants to fine non-citizens for violating online purity rules, so this is the result. Blame the UK for this bullshit. The rules say you must geoblock the UK or be fined, and then sometimes you still get fined anyway.

Such a delicate balance. The US 'free speech over everything', also allows anti-science and conspiracy theories. But this UK example, seems to be a good example why allowing all the US Crazy is better option.

What exactly is the example?

Sorry, I'm in the UK so I haven't read the article that the author has decided to block my access to.

Re: Bullshit About Bullshit Machines [pdf]

#34

Post by josefritzishere »

ramon156 wrote: post #3

Something that is still not clear to me is, what is conscious even. It references the Chinese Room experiment: > Suppose that artificial intelligence research has succeeded in programming a computer to behave as if it understands Chinese. The machine accepts Chinese characters as input, carries out each instruction of the program step by step, and then produces Chinese characters as output. The machine does this so p…

The discussion of AI "consciousness" always recedes into a semantic fog. It's not alive. It's not thinking. Anthropormorphizing software does not benefit our understanding, only it's marketing. ECREE (Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence) There has been no evidence of consciousness, extraordinary or otherwise. Everything else is rhetorical nonsense.

Re: Bullshit About Bullshit Machines [pdf]

#35

Post by tardedmeme »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #24
te_chris wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the country isn't blocking his site. his self-importance is. OFCOM doesn't give a shit about this blog.

From others "Kyle has spent an insane amount of effort to get answers from OFCOM, got none, and as such blocks the UK for self-preservation. The UK wants to fine non-citizens for violating online purity rules, so this is the result" If he can't get an answer, then probably better to not get charged with something.

[dead]

Re: Bullshit About Bullshit Machines [pdf]

#36

Post by wolttam »

projektfu wrote: post #14
ramon156 wrote: post #3

Something that is still not clear to me is, what is conscious even. It references the Chinese Room experiment: > Suppose that artificial intelligence research has succeeded in programming a computer to behave as if it understands Chinese. The machine accepts Chinese characters as input, carries out each instruction of the program step by step, and then produces Chinese characters as output. The machine does this so p…

I think these questions were addressed by Searle[1]. His argument is not that AI is impossible, it's that the existence of surprisingly human-like behavior doesn't turn a non-cognitive system into a cognitive one. The strong AI hypothesis is that you can make a computational system where, if its output is similar to what a human would produce by cognition, the system must model cognition. The Chinese room is an argum…

Consider cognition as simply the manipulation of information and data into something different and LLMs can do plenty of that.

Animals perform cognition.

We shouldn't confuse consciousness or agency or with cognition.

Re: Bullshit About Bullshit Machines [pdf]

#37

Post by pron »

ramon156 wrote: post #3

Something that is still not clear to me is, what is conscious even. It references the Chinese Room experiment: > Suppose that artificial intelligence research has succeeded in programming a computer to behave as if it understands Chinese. The machine accepts Chinese characters as input, carries out each instruction of the program step by step, and then produces Chinese characters as output. The machine does this so p…

> We're also a neural network, are we any more clever than a simulated one?

This is tangential, but it is highly unlikely that we are "a neural network". Neural networks are an architecture loosely inspired by some aspects of the brain, but e.g. it's highly unlikely that we learn by backpropagation (neural signals don't travel in that direction). The brain is a network of neurons, but neural networks are something else. Neural networks probably don't work as the brain does.

Re: Bullshit About Bullshit Machines [pdf]

#38

Post by qsera »

ramon156 wrote: post #3

Something that is still not clear to me is, what is conscious even. It references the Chinese Room experiment: > Suppose that artificial intelligence research has succeeded in programming a computer to behave as if it understands Chinese. The machine accepts Chinese characters as input, carries out each instruction of the program step by step, and then produces Chinese characters as output. The machine does this so p…

I think we can talk about intelligence without introducing consciousness.

So there are two questions

1. Is LLMs really showing intelligent behavior. 2. Is that real intelligence.

I think even to the first question, the answer is no. Because really intelligent behavior that can solve complex math problems should be also be able to do basic things like counting, without any extra mechanisms. Intelligent behavior would understand low level things, and building understanding of higher level things using them. When an entity shows "understanding of higher level things, without showing an understanding of some of the low level things involved, then it becomes clear that the entity is not intelligent.

So this should be proof enough to identify that LLMs does not in fact show intelligent behavior. It is just some trick. An illusion. So we can reach this conclusions even without consider the implementation and training of LLMs, which We would only have to consider it to answer the second question, which was not required because it failed the first one.

Re: Bullshit About Bullshit Machines [pdf]

#39

Post by tmvphil »

estimator7292 wrote: post #19
YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds more like a self-imposed penalty by the author. I mean I can read most of the world internet without such a message so I don't know what it even means.

This is what the UK government wants. Kyle has spent an insane amount of effort to get answers from OFCOM, got none, and as such blocks the UK for self-preservation. The UK wants to fine non-citizens for violating online purity rules, so this is the result. Blame the UK for this bullshit. The rules say you must geoblock the UK or be fined, and then sometimes you still get fined anyway.

Demanding that a bureaucracy promise to not fine you or pre-clear your behavior is just not how things are done in any other realm of business.

Re: Bullshit About Bullshit Machines [pdf]

#40

Post by projektfu »

wolttam wrote: post #36
projektfu wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think these questions were addressed by Searle[1]. His argument is not that AI is impossible, it's that the existence of surprisingly human-like behavior doesn't turn a non-cognitive system into a cognitive one. The strong AI hypothesis is that you can make a computational system where, if its output is similar to what a human would produce by cognition, the system must model cognition. The Chinese room is an argum…

Consider cognition as simply the manipulation of information and data into something different and LLMs can do plenty of that. Animals perform cognition. We shouldn't confuse consciousness or agency or with cognition.

That seems like moving the goalposts to a place where the GP (or anyone in the field promoting "artificial intelligence") wouldn't want to move them to.
Post reply on HN