61–70 of 153 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I stopped thinking for myself, therefore I am not.
In a world where everyone is using LLMs, the only way to differentiate oneself is to actually think. I don’t know if this is part of the idea behind having some in-house philosophers but it would be interesting. If I was a big lab I’d definitely want some “clean room” humans providing input that’s not just what a model regurgitated.
I wonder if anyone who is connected with actual academic philosophy can comment on this. I'm pretty skeptical.
This is a field where it is notoriously hard to get a real academic position, I would bet there is no shortage of people for these roles.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Find non-Utilitarian alternative to Effective Altruism by somehow channeling Dostoevsky? Propriety and Reward?
Socrates argued if you believe something is evil and powerful people do evil then by definition they are not "powerful" -- they are just "evil". As a corollary, if you believe something is good and the people who do good happen to be the weakest members of society, by definition, they are "powerful" -- it is society that is messed up.
I don't buy the article's title "Why big AI labs are hiring so many philosophers". They probably just hire one or two, and hundreds of software engineers. I always found it somewhat annoying that a philosophy study would present itself by stating that graduated philosophers have great job opportunities, implying that studying philosophy would not be a bad choice. It just attracts really smart people, and these tend t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please don't post snarky one-liners here. This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html .
My bad, I meant for this to come off more funny than snarky. Appreciate the check. EDIT: Upon finishing reading the other comments on this article though...I feel a bit singled out. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Socrates argued if you believe something is evil and powerful people do evil then by definition they are not "powerful" -- they are just "evil". As a corollary, if you believe something is good and the people who do good happen to be the weakest members of society, by definition, they are "powerful" -- it is society that is messed up.
Getting the feeling that Socrates had a different definition for "powerful" than most.
my comment from 12 yrs ago came true lol https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8517186 take that top responder > From philosophy? Are you kidding? There's simply no way AI is ever going to come from a bunch of people arguing over what is "qualia" and what is "consciousness
Hmm I spent a good amount of time in big tech, now work in AI, and I minored in philosophy at Berkeley back in the day (Parmenides, Socrates, Plato etc.) How do I align myself with such a job?
Genuinely, understanding around philosophy of action has been deeply enriching over my life. To anyone trying to decide on a minor philosophy is always an excellent choice.
Given the the labs are trying to create [super] human-like consciousness, partly through the guidance of huge system prompts, and many philosophers are experts in textual descriptions of consciousness it makes sense
[0] https://www.amazon.com/World-Appears-Journey-into-Consciousn...>
My key takeaway was this: I feel, therefore I am; not sure if any more conscious than plants.