drosophila

I think you may have misread their comment.

From watching the opening I didn't like the writing of the dialogue.

Pretty good track record with videogames too.

Some ARM CPUs that are advertised as microcontrollers have 32 bit address spaces and roughly the same power as an i486.

This model isn’t “learning” anything in any way that is even remotely like how humans learn. You are deliberately simplifying the complexity of the human brain to make that comparison.

I do think the complexity of artificial neural networks is overstated. A real neuron is a lot more complex than an artificial one, and real neurons are not simply feed forward like ANNs (which have to be because they are trained using back-propagation), but instead have their own spontaneous activity (which kinda implies that real neural networks don't learn using stochastic gradient descent with back-propagation). But to say that there's nothing at all comparable between the way humans learn and the way ANNs learn is wrong IMO.

If you read books such as V.S. Ramachandran and Sandra Blakeslee's Phantoms in the Brain or Oliver Sacks' The Man Who Mistook His Wife For a Hat you will see lots of descriptions of patients with anosognosia brought on by brain injury. These are people who, for example, are unable to see but also incapable of recognizing this inability. If you ask them to describe what they see in front of them they will make something up on the spot (in a process called confabulation) and not realize they've done it. They'll tell you what they've made up while believing that they're telling the truth. (Vision is just one example, anosognosia can manifest in many different cognitive domains).

It is V.S Ramachandran's belief that there are two processes that occur in the Brain, a confabulator (or "yes man" so to speak) and an anomaly detector (or "critic"). The yes-man's job is to offer up explanations for sensory input that fit within the existing mental model of the world, whereas the critic's job is to advocate for changing the world-model to fit the sensory input. In patients with anosognosia something has gone wrong in the connection between the critic and the yes man in a particular cognitive domain, and as a result the yes-man is the only one doing any work. Even in a healthy brain you can see the effects of the interplay between these two processes, such as with the placebo effect and in hallucinations brought on by sensory deprivation.

I think ANNs in general and LLMs in particular are similar to the yes-man process, but lack a critic to go along with it.

What implications does that have on copyright law? I don't know. Real neurons in a petri dish have already been trained to play games like DOOM and control the yoke of a simulated airplane. If they were trained instead to somehow draw pictures what would the legal implications of that be?

There's a belief that laws and political systems are derived from some sort of deep philosophical insight, but I think most of the time they're really just whatever works in practice. So, what I'm trying to say is that we can just agree that what OpenAI does is bad and should be illegal without having to come up with a moral imperative that forces us to ban it.

It's going to get harder and harder to do that as cellphones get better though.

iPhones already have satellite SOS feature which works worldwide, and are starting to roll out satellite texting for non-emergency use. There are a few Android models that are slated to do the same, and it's only a matter of time before most phones can do this.

There are plenty of phones that are waterproof (or rated for submersion in 5 meters of water for 30 minutes or whatever) and that's only going to become more common too.

My phone lasts for about 2 days on a charge with how much I use it, and I charge it every night. That's only going to get better with better battery technologies (the trend of phones getting thinner in response to increased battery capacity has actually somewhat reversed in recent years).

So, in a classic horror movie scenario with 5 or so people they'd need a reason why every single person is out of charge or has their phone broken. Even if the protagonists can't get themselves out of the situation they're in using their phones (because they're broken or whatever) you still need to answer how they got into that situation in the first place if they have offline maps and GPS navigation. That's not as big of a problem but it eliminates "they got lost" as a premise for why they're in some spooky woods or wherever.

It seems to me that you'd either need to set the story in an abandoned mine or make the antagonist explicitly supernatural.

Make the page 15x more bloated with JavaScript popups and it'll be "modern".

There are plenty of applications for machine learning, logic engines, etc. They've been used in many industries since the 1970s.

You live on the edge of the developed area, with suburb on one side and countryside on the other.

And more homes went up, transforming the area that you're in into more suburb, and cutting you off from nature.

Do you think the people who moved into those houses also wanted to live with suburb on one side and nature on the other? Conversely, how do you think the people living near the previous edge of the suburb felt when your house went up?

Do you see the problem with this kind of development?

The other day I saw a car with a Rosie the Riveter bumper sticker next to Trump 2024 sticker.

But the fact that even just a single rail car holds 360 commuters, equivalent to 180 cars or more on the highway changes the math completely.

Absolutely. The fact that 3 million people pass through Shinjuku station every day is a testament to that.

If all of those people lived in a city in the US it would be the country's third largest, behind NY and LA. (If we're going by the entire urban area instead of just within city limits it would be the 20th, just ahead of the Baltimore-Columbia-Towson metropolitan statistical area.)

All in a space that's smaller than most highway interchanges.

And that's not even using two-level train cars (which is where your figure for 360 people per train car comes from I think?).