Continue to celebrate it!

Anybody got the source handy?

(You might want to share average wait times in the US vs CA these days; it no longer favors the US iirc)

came here for the units explanation. ty.

This is kinda weird to contrast with the general decline in the death penalty. Murder by random dude in a suit is... not great. (Assault wasn't great either fwiw.) If the world is such that every system is corrupt, surely its easier to corrupt individuals.

There's a setting to pick the version, no?

oldie but a goodie.

Please read the article. It contradicts you, and argues that LLMs aren't consciousness cause they can think of, count em, 3 niche theories that the authors like which are impossible for anything not made of meat to qualify for.

I'll give them mildly more credit; they cite sources for 2 and 3. The sources just don't seem convincing at all imo.

(I admit to using the very royal we, as in 'humanity knows how to do this, more or less' and 'given we mine the asteroid belt for a big enough computer'.)

DNA made a bunch of random proteins alive, and DNA is just 4 letters!

(book? The linked article is like 4 pages. References are somewhat larger, but nothing over 60 afaict?)

They claim that silicon is essentially incapable of doing what is needed; if you disagree with this, then computationally everything you can build with a circuit board + SSD + RAM you can build with an LLM with a deep layer or 7. In particular, you can do online learning of a sort.

I note that wasps and some beetles don't seem to have memory whatsoever, and plasticity seems awfully low. The authors, and I think most people, would say they are probably a little conscious.

emulation is a better word; adopted.

Sure, but you also let us tape wires to the rock. With enough wires and code and maybe a little quantum computer, I'm pretty sure I could simulate the atoms in a small brain.

This is strictly false, generalization in LLMs is well documented.

It's also not relevant. Read the first point in the article: intelligence != consciousness. Individual ants, bats, and fish do not do anything very creative (certainly less creative than gpt-2), yet they are probably all conscious.

Reasons given:

• Intelligence is not consciousness
• Silicon brains are not made of meat
• Consciousness requires meat (and/or a particular winding of neurons)

Found a full pdf of this book, the word "mind" appears 10 times or so, none of them match. The word "master's" also appears a handful of time, but again nothing that matches (and usually in quotes of other folks). It is indeed full of some winners though. Granted, it's a translation from french. Presumably there are several (I was looking at Markmann's)

Maybe change the attribution though; I can't find it attributed to Fanon anywhere but facebook.

Source please?

It is not listed in wikiquite link and a thesis which includes the phrase 'colonized mind' a bunch never actually quotes Fanon as using the words.

It's the sort of thing discussed in 'the wretched of the earth'; but I strongly suspect the quote is hallucinated (presumably by humans)

And point 3, as far as I can tell from this argument, isn't serious. It merely asserts that there are some models of consciousness that would prevent us from using the term for AI. But the models aren't 'popular', 'widespread', or justified at all afaict. It's just that the author has a pet causal mechanism they made up. It's also pretty abelist by my read.

integrated information theory (IIT), starts from the essential properties of consciousness — those that are true of every experience we can have. For instance, we experience every visual scene as a single, integrated whole: its left and right side, colours and shapes are bound together to make the experience what it is.

In other words, if you've got any sort of trouble integrating a visual scene, then you aren't conscious. Sure.