Its Low voltage so pumps might be more feasible

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)

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.

Fair enough. The crux of my argument is self awareness is an evolutionary trait for evolutionary purposes. If you sim/emulate the same processes in a different environment then it does not serve the evolutionary purposes of the organism, its definitionally not self awareness. To put it another way, the system doing the simulation is less efficient then the thing it is simulating. And energy efficiency is part of what self awareness delivers to an evolutionary system. To be clear I am not ruling out a machine can be aware of its own economy as part of making it intelligent, I am just saying a simulation distorts the very economy that self awareness is to operate on.

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.

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.

We have Facebook ...

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

Is that suppose to impress us? I too can copy code

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

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.

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

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

*Democrat Socialists

We wouldn't even call it AI anything then. The whole framing as it is now is to undermine creative work. It's hard to imagine how it would even remotely resemble what it is now, a cold reading con.

Do you think Musk is making good faith arguments, and if so, what are they?