The catch is that you won’t be one of the few people that are still around.

Neither am I - but the results usually aren’t worse than Google’s, and with fewer ads.

I may need to give Kagi a try though.

I’d much rather just take my searches elsewhere.

That would require them to train AI on something smarter than humans. Until that happens, the output of generative AI will only be faster than humans, not smarter.

You say that, but Google has explicitly been made worse in order to force people to look through more search results, so that Google can make more money on ads. Remember when you could use logical operators in search criteria to get better results?

You can’t make Google’s search results better, though, and their decline in search results quality is why I’ve stopped using Google altogether.

If the tiny person wasn’t going so fast that it’s in orbit around the big thing, yeah - all you have to do to get the person to fall in is to stop them moving. The problem is that you have to push them reeeeeal hard to get them to stop moving in orbit around the sun. (That’s what Delta-v means - change in velocity.)

I never said it would be a reasonable size, just that it could be represented by a lookup table.

There are a finite number of possible inputs if the network is quantized. (And even if the network isn’t quantized, it just makes the possible input space much larger.) Especially if there’s been connection pruning for input nodes that don’t have a significant impact on the output.

Let’s say you have five inputs. For each possible input from node 1, you have a volume. Input is 3? Go grab volume 3. Node 2 relates to chapter; value is 10? Flip to chapter 10. Each chapter is a series of tables. Node 3 is for which table to look at, node 4 is row, node 5 is column. Voila, your five inputs have become a single output value.

Anything that is immutable and has a finite number of inputs and outputs can be represented by a lookup table.

For the record, I don’t think it was for not being right wing enough. I think it was for being the hateful person he was, combined with the shooter being indoctrinated into the violent right-wing mentality and then caring for someone who was a common Kirk target.

Don’t feed the sea lion.

It’s a discrete phenomenon because my consciousness is not your consciousness. I do not have two consciousnesses at once. Each consciousness is separate from any others - hence, discrete.

As for how I know another person is conscious?

Consciousness is a documented phenomenon that has existed since before I existed. My lived experience matches documented evidence of consciousness, thus I can conclude that, by and large, humans are conscious, although I cannot determine directly whether or not another person is conscious without depending on their testament. They could be a philosophical zombie - a thing that has all outward behaviors of a conscious being without having a consciousness, including lying about having a conscious experience - but the likelihood is low.

Because:

1. Consciousness is a discrete phenomenon that exists, and not all things are conscious. A piece of paper, for example, is not conscious.

2. A string of text can be used to represent any type of data. It would mean that every piece of data is a consciousness, which - if we assume item 1 to be true - cannot be true, as a piece of paper (which is not conscious) can hold the data.

I always thought it was a bit tragically amusing that LLMs can fool people so readily, because it was essentially proof that P-zombies can exist. And we invented them.

As for the Chinese Room and understanding Chinese, my argument has always been that the chart contains an understanding of Chinese - but as the chart itself cannot think, it does not understand Chinese in the way a person does, and as each person who is in the Chinese Room does not - and cannot - glean meaning from the input they receive or the output that they send out, they have no understanding at all. Understanding also implies being able to adapt the knowledge to new situations, and as the chart that drives the Chinese Room is immutable and cannot accomodate novel scenarios, it does not understand Chinese.

Musk’s pattern:

• Overpromise
• Reap investment dollars
• Talk big talk
• Before being called on to deliver, move on to the next thing to overpromise
• Underdeliver, or just completely fail to deliver

It could be represented with a series of lookup tables, especially quantized LLMs. A series of inputs results in a specific output that gets passed to the next set of nodes. Repeat 7 billion times, and the final output from the last set of nodes is a set of token probabilities.

An LLM is a series of immutable nodes that pass results on to the next series of nodes until an output is generated, a functionality that could be perfectly imitated with a very large number of people seeing a series of values passed to them from other people, doing a bit of rigidly defined basic math with them, and passing it on to the next set of people who play the part of the next set of nodes.

The fact that these nodes are immutable, have no persistent state, and only process information in one direction (input to output, and no more) means that an LLM has no persistence of experience. You could potentially argue that the information, as it exists, is a form of fleeting consciousness, but it would be so incredibly alien compared to the lived experience of humans that it would be impossible to relate to in any meaningful way - and it would also mean that every time an LLM is run, the consciousness is created and destroyed for every single word that it outputs… unless you can somehow argue that the consciousness is contained in the set of tokens that gets fed back into the LLM with each word it outputs, which would also mean that any string of text is the equivalent of latent consciousness, which is patently absurd.

The difference between this and the Chinese Room is that you are attempting to understand what the cat is saying, and making a response that both you and the cat understand. You are attempting to communicate. The Chinese Room is many people who do not understand the input, do not understand the output, and have neither the capability nor the will to do either.

Except one of the best assets of a game company is people who know how to make a good game. Retaining their talent is worth the extra pay. Treating veteran game makers like replaceable cogs is how you get the current AAA game industry, with nothing but overpriced lukewarm soul-dead rehashes of prior games that are full of bugs and devoid of merit.

The big corps seem to think that their talent is all in their upper management, and that’s why the industry sucks donkey balls these days.

Someone with a sudden involuntary ventilation hole in their neck.