The key is not to reason with it but to give it “signals” that it will take as gospel. Like “cache is a persistent and common issue” and “test verification is meant to be done in a Windows VM”

Okay but what law would they point to that he violated? National surveillance hasn’t been a crime since the Patrio act, so like what law would he being trying to flee from? Or are the progressive now pro-guillotine?

In the eyes of progressives, I know they would accuse elon of election interference but what would they accuse Thiel of exactly?

A million dollars would be 10 teachers at 6 figures, could have been 5 thousand teachers for a year.

I guess it’s like describing color to a blind man. I am telling you that others experience books in a much deeper and profound way but you are unable to relate and unable see the point that is being made. So you as a person blind to this will either have to trust other people have vision you lack or insist we are all blind.

You can lower the bar for what you consider intelligent, but that doesn’t make the LLM any more capable.

And no, I am not talking about emotions in regards to reading a book. Do you simply experience a book as a set of words and emotions attached to those words? I think you are selling yourself short in order to put LLMs on a pedestal.

I meant LLMs and people experience reading a book differently in the internal sense. Or at least for some people.

That “intelligence” will tell you how it is not as intelligent if you ask directly. This is not because it’s intelligent and KNOWS it’s limitations but because it picked up on my signal for what I wanted and gave something resembling that to me. You could ask it the opposite thing and arrive at a very different conclusion. https://claude.ai/share/97859aae-beb2-4245-a8b1-460122ee4aa1

I would even say the analogies it gave aren’t entirely accurate. A person reading a book experiences it very differently than an LLM. And this is a key insight to an element of the Turing test where you ask it to explain some poetry (not simply write a poem).

I meant signal manipulation, but sure, that includes manipulating humans since we are just another signal input. That isn’t a statement on values, just an objective description of how it works.

What exactly are the requirements for this tech? We know that accuracy can’t be one of the requirements.

If we crowd source a rocket i am told they don’t ask questions when we offer them a seat. Oh wait, that was just another lie. I guess a guillotine would be more cost effective than a rocket…

Because signal matching and manipulation is not intelligence unless you’re willing to admit that is all you are capable of.

It’s impressive until it isn’t because it decided to “fix” an issue by simply ignoring an exception.

I told you before, I am not interested in debating values. Questioning my own values or misrepresenting my own position is not going to goad me into debating you. It only gives me more evidence that such an effort would be futile in regards to facts and the truth. Take this as a lesson in how to engage serious people in the future. That is how you “maximize” the value of this interaction.

He really is drinking his own cool aide.

As a parent of two, this is best for the kids they claim to worry about. It makes potty training much less stressful

If my opinion is of no consequence then let us both find a more meaningful endeavor

Or we could hang them upside down and gut them: https://youtube.com/shorts/QMmkEf-qN7I

But I’m not picky, just saying we have options

Bdsm…

I am flattered my opinion on Elon means so much to you, so I will throw you a bone. You left out some facts I consider important, like he had to go to court to be retroactively considered a founder. A person who values a good debate would address such common criticisms head on instead of pretending that is not a relevant fact to be addressed. I simply value a good debate and this is not it.