|
| ▲ | fredoliveira 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Well, two things: it's the last sentence of the film; being on hour into something you're calling propaganda is brave. Anyways. I thought the documentary was inspiring. Deepmind are the only lab that has historically prioritized science over consumer-facing product (that's changing now, however). I think their work with AlphaFold is commendable. |
| |
| ▲ | DrierCycle 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It's science under the creative boundary of binary/symbols. And as analog thinkers, we should be developing far greater tools than these glass ceilings. And yes, having finished the film, it's far more propagandic than it began as. Science is exceeding the envelop of paradox, and what I see here is obeying the envelope in order to justify the binary as a path to AGI. It's not a path. The symbol is a bottleneck. | | |
| ▲ | Zigurd 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Everything between your ears is an electrochemical process. It's all math and there is no "creative boundary." There's plenty to criticize in AI hype that we're going to get to machine intelligence very soon. I suspect a lot of the hype is oriented towards getting favorable treatment from the government if not outright subsidies. But claiming that there are fundamental barriers is a losing bet. | | |
| ▲ | DrierCycle 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | It doesn't happen "btwn ears" and math is an illusion of imprecision. The fundamental barrier is frameworks and computers will not be involved. There will be software obviously. But it will never be computed. |
|
| |
| ▲ | amitport 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Plenty *commercial* labs frequently prioritized pure science over *immediate* consumer products, but none done so out of charity. Deepmind included. |
|
|
| ▲ | Zigurd 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Your mind emerges from a network of neurons. Machine models are probably far from enabling that kind of emergence, but if what's going on between our ears isn't computation, it's magic. |
| |
| ▲ | DrierCycle 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It's not magic. It's neural syntax. And nothing trapped by computation is occurring. It's not a model, it is the world as actions. The computer is a hand-me-down tool under evolution's glass ceiling. This should be obvious: binary, symbols, metaphors. These are toys (ie they are models), and humans are in our adolescent stage using these toys. Only analog correlation gets us to agency and thought. | |
| ▲ | 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
| ▲ | MattRix 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Is there a fundamental difference between it and true agency/thought? I’m not so sure. |
| |
| ▲ | DrierCycle 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Agency will emerge from exceeding the bottleneck of evolution's hand-me-down tools: binary, symbols, metaphors. As long as these unconscious sportscasters for thought "explain" to us what thought "is", we are trapped. DeepMind is simply another circular hamster wheel of evolution. Just look at the status-propaganda the film heightens in order to justify the magic. |
|
|
| ▲ | dboreham 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Why is it absurd? Because believing that would break some deep delusion humans have about themselves? |
