Search Ideas
47 ideas match your query.:
Pretty confident takes as for a person who isn't going to sell you something useless :)
I would prefer to doubt a possibility to avoid death, there's 4B years of pretty reliable statistics. But I believe you.
leads to stasis, unhappiness
And for that matter: excessive load of irrelevant cognitive work, like overcoming ambitious goal for the sake of rationalizations of rationalizations of rationalizations, paying time and sacrificing attention to the own emotions, e.g. very actual reality of being here and now on regular basis -- that's what actually could lead to unhappiness. There's nothing bad in death. But that's an existential disaster -- to not live.
leads to stasis, unhappiness
And for that matter: excessive load of irrelevant cognitive work, like overcoming ambitious goal for the sake of rationalizations of rationalizations of rationalizations, paying time and sacrificing attention for the own emotions, e.g. very actual reality of being here and now on regular basis -- that's what actually could lead to unhappiness. There's nothing bad in death. But that's an existential disaster -- to not live.
leads to stasis, unhappiness
And for that matter: excessive load of irrelevant cognitive work, like overcoming ambition goal for the sake of rationalizations of rationalizations of rationalizations, paying time and sacrificing attention to own emotions, e.g. very actual reality of being here and now on regular basis -- that's what actually could lead to unhappiness. There's nothing bad in death. But that's an existential disaster -- to not live.
leads to stasis, unhappiness
And for that matter: excessive load of irrelevant cognitive work, like overcoming ambition goal for the sake of rationalizations of rationalizations of rationalizations, paying time and sacrificing attention to own emotions, e.g. very actual reality of being here and now on regular basis -- that's what actually could lead to unhappiness. There's nothing bad in death. But that an existential disaster -- to not live.
It’s bad
Is prejudgment and conformism any good? Popper is famous for his theory of scientific revolutions, de-facto theory of accepting a fact that you have only merely a "current paradigm", that inevitable ignores observational facts in the name of infrastructural and logistical cost of maintenance more-or-less consistent consensus tradition. And readiness to throw it all away as soon as there will be just enough black swans around. Wouldn't it be more honest and humbly just to accept the inconsistency as a basis?
death
Everything leads there https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3xIs0aajN4
irrational
What's bad in being irrational? Ration overrated and has pretty indirect relation with the common sense. How rationality will help you to stand the right up, and do the thing? And what if you can't? In general: why not considering each judgement, as a true one? Let's talk about that: each person has it's own experience, which you will never live thru, and from their personal perception of this reality, their point absolutely have right to make sense. Not better, nor worse, then anyone's else. Could you prove that that person actually live in the same world you do? How you can be sure that everything you know make sense, and next moment you will not wake up, saying: what a weird dream I saw! How you would measure a truenesslessnessless, how can you expect that successful strategy will not fail next day? Let's touch the ground for a moment: what we ACTUALLY know about us, and the place where we are? If you like me, you know about this world only two things:
1. the World is such so it's existence, essence, the law, a form of being -- inevitable leads to appearing there of you;
2. and you, wonderfully, has an ability -- to perceive an experience, live thru time and flow of entropy, learn, learn something about your own existence, beingnesslessnessless, learn about limit of own ability to learn -- marvelously comprehend something despite all of that, something, or maybe, at least, one -- for sure -- the World is such the place you know about for sure exactly one thing -- whereinit thisnesslessnesslesssness of is allows to exist in it the you one, who able to perceive and comprehend it. And that's it. Everything behind that -- our imagination. But you are here, and I respect it, and welcoming you. So I'm totally open to trust any story of your own perspective on this journey, because: who I am to judge, what is true. And it's okay for me if you are not or notn't.
3. Because things here always falls into two items: the ones which lands in first or second.
4. And the rest ones.
irrational
What's bad in being irrational? Ration overrated and has pretty indirect relation with the common sense. How rationality will help you to stand the right up, and do the thing? And what if you can't? In general: why not considering each judgement, as a true one? Let's talk about that: each person has it's own experience, which you will never live thru, and from their personal perception of this reality, their point absolutely have right to make sense. Not better, nor worse, then anyone's else. Could you prove that that person actually live in the same world you do? How you can be sure that everything you know make sense, and next moment you will not wake up, saying: what a weird dream I saw! How you would measure a truenesslessnessless, how can you expect that successful strategy will not fail next day? Let's touch the ground for a moment: what we ACTUALLY know about us, and the place where we are? If you like me, you know about this world only two things:
1. the World is such so it's existence, essence, the law, a form of being -- inevitable leads to appearing there of you;
2. and you, wonderfully, has an ability -- perceive an experience, live thru time and flow of entropy, learn, learn something about your own existence, beingnesslessnessless, learn about limit of own ability to learn -- marvelously comprehend something despite all of that, something, or maybe, at least, one -- for sure -- the World is such the place you know about for sure exactly one thing -- whereinit thisnesslessnesslesssness of is allows to exist in it the you one, who able to perceive and comprehend it. And that's it. Everything behind that -- our imagination. But you are here, and I respect it, and welcoming you. So I'm totally open to trust any story of your own perspective on this journey, because: who I am to judge, what is true. And it's okay for me if you are not or notn't.
3. Because things here always falls into two items: the ones which lands in first or second.
4. And the rest ones.
irrational
What's bad in being irrational? Ration overrated and has pretty indirect relation with the common sense. How rationality will help you to stand the right up, and do the thing? And what if you can't? In general: why not considering each judgement, as a true one. Let's talk about that: each person has it's own experience, which you will never live thru, and from their personal perception of this reality, their point absolutely have right to make sense. Not better, nor worse, then anyone's else. Could you prove that that person actually live in the same world you do? How you can be sure that everything you know make sense, and next moment you will not wake up, saying: what a weird dream I saw! How you would measure a truenesslessnessless, how can you expect that successful strategy will not fail next day? Let's touch the ground for a moment: what we ACTUALLY know about us, and the place where we are? If you like me, you know about this world only two things:
1. the World is such so it's existence, essence, the law, a form of being -- inevitable leads to appearing there of you;
2. and you, wonderfully, has an ability -- perceive an experience, live thru time and flow of entropy, learn, learn something about your own existence, beingnesslessnessless, learn about limit of own ability to learn -- marvelously comprehend something despite all of that, something, or maybe, at least, one -- for sure -- the World is such the place you know about for sure exactly one thing -- whereinit thisnesslessnesslesssness of is allows to exist in it the you one, who able to perceive and comprehend it. And that's it. Everything behind that -- our imagination. But you are here, and I respect it, and welcoming you. So I'm totally open to trust any story of your own perspective on this journey, because: who I am to judge, what is true. And it's okay for me if you are not or notn't.
3. Because things here always falls into two items: the ones which lands in first or second.
4. And the rest ones.
What's awesome about LLM is how easy it became to do an interdisciplinary meta-analysis.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003347205807031
What is awesome about LLM is how it it became easy to do an interdisciplinary meta-analysis.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003347205807031
What is awesome about LLM is how it it became to do an interdisciplinary meta-analysis.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0003347205807031
Most ridiculous are takes about so-called Turing test, which, AFAIK, originally was just a bad misogynic joke. Some kind of evolutionary psychology experiments, which people already have set up to study limits of different animals cognitive abilities and abilities to make judgements (e.g. role-playing, like: what ones know about other know about them, and vice versa), or a development of infant children's abilities to interpret concepts like geometry of space, cause and consequence -- would be way better criteria for the AGI system metrics evaluation.
Since the carrier language is the fundament, I'm stuck significantly in attempts to elaborate this topic deeper. https://x.com/VictorTaelin did a huge progress in this direction, I believe, but I know no details. Disappointingly few people working on this around the world (though, it could change quickly with modern trends). The next small step -- not only representation of knowledge and reasoning about it, but compression and knowledge synthesis (which LLM in it's way doing not so bad, but not so consistently and effective), thru AIXI. Then -- epistemic framework, like NARS, to learn from real-world empiric experience. And only then -- complex game theory/goal setting/economics/interaction with, and interpretation of other's behavior. And only after that -- there's make sense to discuss consciousness, as an introspection of other's observation/interpretation/modeling.
The Beginning of Infinity
Heard about it, have not read though. I do not expect AGI from LLM. But it's an awesome tool that helps speed-up learning, research and prototyping. And also all this hype accelerate some money to this topic, which is good. Indeed, if natural intelligence possible, why artificial -- can not? According to the roadmap, I more trust in good old-fashioned symbolic AGI and formal methods. NARS + AIXI + elegant dependent modal or substructural (maybe homotopic) typed programming language with strong meta-theoretic properties, as a carrier of observations, knowledge and judgments + a bit of game theory and evolutionary psychology = this is the way, I believe.
And maybe some tricky computational non-von Neumann architecture to have a nice computational complexity for that (not sure about that, but plausible it make sense to utilize some sort of analogous computations in addition to digital ones).
The Beginning of Infinity
Heard about it, have not read though. I do not expect AGI from LLM. But it's an awesome tool that helps speed-up learning, research and prototyping. And also all this hype accelerate some money to this topic, which is good. Indeed, if natural intelligence possible, why artificial -- can not? According to the roadmap, I more trust in good old-fashioned symbolic AGI and formal methods. NARS + AIXI + elegant dependent modal or substructural (maybe homotopic) typed language with strong meta-theoretic properties + a bit of game theory and evolutionary psychology = this is the way, I believe.
And maybe some tricky computational non-von Neumann architecture to have a nice computational complexity for that (not sure about that, but plausible it make sense to utilize some sort of analogous computations in addition to digital ones).
The Beginning of Infinity
Heard about it, have not read though. I do not expect AGI from LLM. But it's an awesome tool that helps speed-up learning, research and prototyping. And also all this hype accelerate some money to this topic, which is good. Indeed, if natural intelligence possible, why artificial -- can not? According to the roadmap, I more trust in good old-fashioned symbolic AGI and formal methods. NURPL + AIXI + elegant dependent modal or substructural (maybe homotopic) typed language with strong meta-theoretic properties + a bit of game theory and evolutionary psychology = this is the way, I believe.
And maybe some tricky computational non-von Neumann architecture to have a nice computational complexity for that (not sure about that, but plausible it make sense to utilize some sort of analogous computations in addition to digital ones).
Hello, and nice to meet you. Your twit https://x.com/dchackethal/status/2031465139401093501 bring me here.
It seemed relevant to my curiosity about AGI topic, so since I believe in synergy and want to be surrounded more by such context, signed up to the website, just in case.
If you interested to discuss and share some AGI-relevant thoughts, I'm in, just let me know. Not a professional at this topic (just an average software engineer), but investigated topic for quire a while, so, I believe, have something to put on the table. And with LLM came to our live -- the path from the vision to the result -- become notable closer, so, who know, maybe we can really bring something beautiful to life.
Hello, and nice to meet you. Your twit https://x.com/dchackethal/status/2031465139401093501 bring me here.
It seemed relevant to my curiosity about AGI topic, so since I believe in synergy and want to be surrounded more by such context, signet up to the website, just in case.
If you interested to discuss and share some AGI-relevant thoughts, I'm in, just let me know. Not a professional at this topic (just an average software engineer), but investigated topic for quire a while, so, I believe, have something to put on the table. And with LLM came to our live -- the path from the vision to the result -- become notable closer, so, who know, maybe we can really bring something beautiful to life.