| ▲ | torlok 2 days ago |
| This is a bunch of "I believe" and "I think" with no sources by a random internet person. |
|
| ▲ | ctoth 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| Ah, I see you have discovered blogs! They're a cool form of writing from like ~20 years ago which are still pretty great. Good thing they show up on this website, it'd be rather dull with only newspapers and journal articles doncha think? |
|
| ▲ | ajoseps 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| he’s not a “random internet person”, he created Redis. Despite that, I don’t know how authoritative of a figure he is with respect to AI research. He’s definitely a prolific programmer though. |
| |
| ▲ | XorNot 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | There are plenty of Nobel laureates who well, do rest on their laurels and dive deep into pseudoscience after that. Accomplishment in one field does not make one an expert, nor even particularly worth listening to, in any other. Certainly it doesn't remove the burden of proof or necessity to make an actual argument based on more then simply insisting something is true. | | | |
| ▲ | nurettin 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | To be fair, you may find equally capable random people in this thread, doesn't mean they speak with any kind of authority. | |
| ▲ | megous 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | That still qualifies as a random internet person, wrt the topic. And I think the emphasis is on no sources and I beliefs and I thinks, in any case :) | | |
|
|
| ▲ | desbo 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Yeah, it’s called “Reflections”. |
|
| ▲ | matthewmacleod 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That is what a blog post is. Someone documenting what they think about a topic. It's not the case that every form of writing has to be an academic research paper. Sometimes people just think things, and say them – and they may be wrong, or they may be right. And they sometime have some ideas that might change how you think about an issue as a result. |
|
| ▲ | jacquesm 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Indeed, and, what do you 'believe' or 'think' in response? |
|
| ▲ | dgellow 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's the personal blog of a famous internet person |
|
| ▲ | dist-epoch 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What is a "source"? Isn't it just "another random internet person"? |
|
| ▲ | echelon 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > by a random internet person. The creator of Redis. |
| |
| ▲ | cinntaile 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Sure but quite a few claims in the article are about AI research. He does not have any qualifications there. If the focus was more on usefulness, that would be a different discussion and then his experience does add weight. | | |
| ▲ | djdishsv 2 days ago | parent [-] | | > smart, intelligent person gives opinion > woah buddy this persons opinion isn’t worth anything more than a random homeless person off the street. they’re not an expert in this field Is there a term for this kind of pedantry? Obviously we can put more weight behind the words a person says if they’ve proven themselves trustworthy in prior areas - and we should! We want all people to speak and let the best idea win. If we fallback to only expert opinions are allowed that’s asking to get exploited. And it’s also important to know if antirez feels comfortable spouting nonsense. This is like a basic cornerstone of a functioning society. Though, I realize this “no man is innately better than another, evaluate on merit” is mostly a western concept which might be some of my confusion. | | |
| ▲ | cinntaile 21 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Evaluate on merit indeed and that is not what is happening. The parent I replied to used an authoritative argument that is not based on (relevant) merit. | |
| ▲ | blibble 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Obviously we can put more weight behind the words a person says if they’ve proven themselves trustworthy in prior areas - and we should! no, you shouldn't this is how you end up with crap like vaccine denialism going mainstream "but he's a doctor!" | | |
| ▲ | echelon 2 days ago | parent [-] | | Credentialism isn't a fix for the problem you've outlined. If anything, over-reliance on credentials bolsters and lends credence to crazy claims. The media hyper-fixates on it and amplifies it. We've got Avi Loeb on mainstream podcasts and TV spouting baseless alien nonsense. He's a preeminent in his field, after all. Focus on what you understand. If you don't understand, learn more. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | nutjob2 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Don't see how that gives him more credibility wrt AI. His entirely unsupported statements about AGI are pretty useless, for instance. So many people assume AGI is possible, yet no one has a concrete path to it or even a concrete definition of what it or what form it might take. |
|
