You are the one collapsing tool use into a binary when there are varying degrees of competency and hand holding.

So why are you allergic to people talking about the quality of the tools in regards to capability?

How are you able to understand it’s capability without understanding what tools it is capable of manipulating to effect?

If you are not interested in how it completes the task then you are not an authority on how it works.

It’s relevant to what the parent was saying about LLMs. The success of the LLM in using mathematical tools does not contradict what they were saying. To then accuse them of lying because of a misunderstanding is… bad form.

Aren’t you the least bit curious what tools they gave the LLM and how the LLM used those tools? It’s like back in math class you are asked to solve a quadratic formula but you forgot how. So you use the calculator to try different numbers and the calculator is telling you if you are getting closer. Sure I got the right answer, but it’s hardly a testament to my math skills.

Gates asked Epstein for what kind of antibiotics he could slip his wife without her knowing to treat STDs (allegedly, i don’t want to get sued)

You know the “DeepMind and OpenAi models” is the hint that the LLM model is not the one doing the math. The LLM provides a hypothesis and the DeepMind model provides grounding or feedback on whether the hypothesis even makes sense or works.

Using computers to search for a counter example to a conjecture isn’t exactly new ground and I suspect they did so with the aide of some harness tweaks like some numerical LSP. Like cool, it pushed the envelope but like what the parent said, they grafted on the ability to do a specific task.

Being self aware of myself and my surroundings but not aware of the entire world does not make me not self aware. Same as an entity in a simulation could potentially be self aware but not aware of being in a simulation.

Let’s take this to it’s full conclusion to see why this is not a meaningful distinction. I am not even aware of every cell in my own body, you don’t even need to make reference to the outside world to argue we are not self aware. This line of reasoning makes self-awareness a rather meaningless word.

And stating why I think the simulation hypothesis is not adequate is not the same as disregarding, even if I didn’t fully explain the reasons.

I’m just saying you could use theory to make a better argument then “libs eat cock”. I believe in you

*Democrat Socialists

Sure, and how do you know your thoughts are your own? Like if you have to defend your position by questioning the nature of reality then you got bigger problems.

Just another terminally online ML ignoring material conditions and doing the woke scolding that libs love to do.

Go read what Turing proposed, it is a lot more complex then how it is often parroted. There are many more tests that the latest models would not pass, like explaining poetry (that it was not trained on)

I see the point that the LLM is closer to a 1bit perceptron then it is to the brain?

A simulation that isn’t aware that it is a simulation is not self-aware, which is a qualitative difference from what is being simulated. Consciousness isn’t like some rom you can emulate.

I meam that’s how it was after the founding of the USA. See the sedition act.

Ehh, the devil is in the details. Most DAC techniques requires more energy to capture the CO2 then the energy used to produce the CO2. This particular site might not have that issue, the article doesn’t say, but they are pumping the CO2 underground to be stored. Which sounds a lot like phracking… (I doubt they are pumping the CO2 into the rocks as a gas)

Didn’t we fight a cold war over this? The Soviets wanted a top down internet and it was more expensive and less capable