alan tur(ule)ing
its a shame how the british govt treated him, he was an extraordinary man
Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.
View original on lemmy.mlView original on lemmy.ml
Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.
View original on lemmy.mlits a shame how the british govt treated him, he was an extraordinary man
9 replies
Just because he was gay doesn’t mean he’d like Grindr. There’s very little to like about Grindr, honestly. The ads are incredibly invasive, it tracks the everliving hell out of you, and wants you to pay exorbitant prices to avoid that BS.
LLMs do not consistently pass Turing tests they're often obviously fake
2 fictional men and a depiction of a typical AI booster
The Turing test only measures one thing: how well a given algorithm can pass the Turing test. It's been mythologized to the point of irrelevance.
While I have people's attention: "Schrödinger's cat" is the polar opposite of what people think it is. Erwin Schrödinger hated and strongly disagreed with the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, which holds that quantum mechanical systems are indeterministic until observed or measured. He did not come up with the "Schrödinger's cat" thought experiment to explain superposition -- he invented it to illustrate, in a macroscopic and intuitive way, why he thought Bohr's and Heisenberg's interpretation was stupid.
Also, Bohr is a fake ass bitch and a fucking redditor before reddit. Einstein was right.
I still remember the first time i learned the intention behind schrödingers cat and i was so relieved because that's how i always saw it
You make a good point and then circle back to what we all already knew anyways: Einstein was right.
So, according to Schrödinger, the cat is either dead or alive, and you just don't know its state until you open the box? Is that it?
What you described is more or less consistent with Schrödinger's views.
In the Copenhagen interpretation, a quantum system is described by a wave function (the probability density of all of its possible states; the cat is maybe dead and maybe alive) until it is observed, at which point it collapses into one of its possible states (the cat is definitively dead or definitively alive).
As far as I can tell, in Schrödinger's views, there is no superposition and there is no collapse, and a system is described directly by its wave function, which changes over time.
But this is all just interpretation. I don't even know where to start looking for empirical evidence that supports one or the other, or whether there's even a point philosophizing about it.
Some people probably find it fun to philosophize about it