It’s very relevant, because this is the reason they hallucinate. They’re just completing the pattern, no matter how nonsensical it is, because they don’t even know what they’re doing. They don’t reason, they just regurgitate whatever fits the pattern. There’s no awareness of what they’re saying, there’s just a logic chain that says “if I say this, then I say this next” without concern about context or reality. No reason, no awareness, no thought.

It does not think it’s human. It’s just mindlessly regurgitating words to fit a pattern. That’s it.

No it doesn’t, it doesn’t even think.

He’s acting like Trump bumbled into making a mistake, but Trump 100% supports the global race to the bottom on corporate taxes. By shattering the goal of a minimum tax he accomplished his goal. He won. You lost to a pigeon.

The recent Medicaid cut to make a few hundred billionaire friends happier/richer was terrible propaganda. Doesn’t that contradict your point?

Zionists collaborated with Nazis to help them deport Jews to Palestine.

Imagine living in a world without being voluntold to do overtime every week.

What is the reason you think philosophy of the mind exists as a field of study?

In part, so we don’t assign intelligence to mindless, unaware, unthinking things like slime mold - it’s so we keep our definitions clear and useful, so we can communicate about and understand what intelligence even is.

What you’re doing actually creates an unclear and useless definition that makes communication harder and spreads misunderstanding. Your definition of intelligence, which is what the AI companies use, has made people more confused than ever about “intelligence” and only serves the interests of the companies for generating hype and attracting investor cash.

Let me rephrase. If your definition of intelligence includes slime mold then the term is not very useful.

There’s a reason philosophy of the mind exists as a field of study. If we just assign intelligence to anything that can solve problems, which is what you seem to be doing, we are forced to assign intelligence to things which clearly don’t have minds and aren’t aware and can’t think. That’s a problem.

If your definition of intelligence doesn’t include awareness it’s not very useful.

My understanding is that the reason LLMs struggle with solving math and logic problems is that those have certain answers, not probabilistic ones. That seems pretty fundamentally different from humans! In fact, we have a tendency to assign too much certainty to things which are actually probabilistic, which leads to its own reasoning errors. But we can also correctly identify actual truth, prove it through induction and deduction, and then hold onto that truth forever and use it to learn even more things.

We certainly do probabilistic reasoning, but we also do axiomatic reasoning i.e. more than probability engines.

Slime mold can solve mazes.

So why is a real “thinking” AI likely impossible? Because it’s bodiless. It has no senses, no flesh, no nerves, no pain, no pleasure. It doesn’t hunger, desire or fear. And because there is no cognition — not a shred — there’s a fundamental gap between the data it consumes (data born out of human feelings and experience) and what it can do with them.

What? No.

Chatbots can’t think because they literally aren’t designed to think. If you somehow gave a chatbot a body it would be just as mindless because it’s just a probability engine.

My definition of artificial is a system that was consciously engineered by humans.

And humans consciously decided what data to include, consciously created most of the data themselves, and consciously annotated the data for training. Conscious decisions are all over the dataset, even if they didn’t design the neural network directly from the ground up. The system still evolved from conscious inputs, you can’t erase its roots and call it natural.

Human-like object concept representations emerge from datasets made by humans, because humans made them.

I’m saying that the terms “natural” and “artificial” are in a dialectical relationship, they define each other by their contradictions. Those words don’t mean anything once you include everything humans do as natural; you’ve effectively defined “artificial” out of existence and as a result also defined “natural” out of existence.

Look at that, it’s working.

What’s working? Iran isn’t any more dependent on Russia than it was before the strikes.

I think you should look at a map sometime. Unless you are taking about Russia-China relations, but that doesn’t seem to be the context here.

There are just as many countries between Iran and Russia as there are between Iran and China, I don’t see why Iran would have to allow itself to be dependent on Russia when China is just as close. Granted, Russia and Iran border the Caspian Sea so they can access each others’ ports, but Iran also has ocean coast so it can access Chinese ports as well. In terms of raw numbers, Iran’s exports to China value $4.59B and imports value $10B. Trade with Russia, by comparison, is $1.9B. Total.

China is actually a closer economic partner with Iran than Russia is, so why wouldn’t Iran be able to turn to China?

Also, Iran is a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Also also, Iran is an observer member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, and looks to be in the process to become a full member eventually.

Also also also, Taiwan condemned Iran’s strikes against Israel, so you know they’re tight with China lol

Jesus do you want me to write you an essay?

I will say they just entered a new 20-year bilateral trade and military cooperation treaty on Jan 17th of this year, which is hardly something Russia would do if they were willing to just destroy Iran in a few months. They did this because trade between the countries has risen sharply due to the sanctions against Russia, and that’s not going away any time soon so it would be foolish to sacrifice them at this stage. Then there’s the suspected missiles and drones that Iran has been (possibly) supplying Russia for its war with Ukraine, and blowing them up would disrupt that supply line.

But if you’re determined to believe Russia wants Iran to be bombed, I won’t be able to stop you.

And I’m saying there’s no way Putin wants Iran to be bombed, and so therefore this was done without his permission or knowledge.

If we define human inputs as “natural” then the word basically ceases to mean anything.

It’s the equivalent of saying that paintings and sculptures emerge naturally because artists are human and humans are natural.

So you think they’re stupid.

Belarus has basically been driven out of the European economy, but that’s hardly something Russia did. If Russia has become an empire and Belarus has lost its sovereignty it’s because Europe decided to force the issue. Bad move, I guess?

Or maybe Belarus and Russia are just allies and they’re working together like normal allies do.

Either way, comparing this to Iran is absurd! Iran has ten times the population. Plus, China is right there. It wouldn’t work.