DrierCycle

Tech is not an extension of the patriarchy?

"Swedish freedom of information laws mean most citizens’ addresses and personal details are openly listed online."

When you are developing an autocratic regime within an elected system, criminal extralegal military action reveals who the leaders are who will act criminally (are "loyal") segregating them from the constitutional adherents who oppose you.

It's a final step to overthrowing the US's elected officials or rendering them powerless.

I'm concerned that coders and the general public will confuse optimization with intelligence. That's the nature of propaganda, substituting sleight of hand to create a false narrative.

btw an excellent explanation, thank you.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-british-journal-...

It doesn't happen "btwn ears" and math is an illusion of imprecision. The fundamental barrier is frameworks and computers will not be involved. There will be software obviously. But it will never be computed.

It's not magic. It's neural syntax. And nothing trapped by computation is occurring. It's not a model, it is the world as actions.

The computer is a hand-me-down tool under evolution's glass ceiling. This should be obvious: binary, symbols, metaphors. These are toys (ie they are models), and humans are in our adolescent stage using these toys.

Only analog correlation gets us to agency and thought.

It's science under the creative boundary of binary/symbols. And as analog thinkers, we should be developing far greater tools than these glass ceilings. And yes, having finished the film, it's far more propagandic than it began as.

Science is exceeding the envelop of paradox, and what I see here is obeying the envelope in order to justify the binary as a path to AGI. It's not a path. The symbol is a bottleneck.

Agency will emerge from exceeding the bottleneck of evolution's hand-me-down tools: binary, symbols, metaphors. As long as these unconscious sportscasters for thought "explain" to us what thought "is", we are trapped. DeepMind is simply another circular hamster wheel of evolution. Just look at the status-propaganda the film heightens in order to justify the magic.

I'm an hour into it, unconvinced.

The illusion that agency 'emerges' from rules like games, is fundamentally absurd.

This is the foundational illusion of mechanics. It's UFOlogy not science.

Sharp wave ripples, nested oscillations, cohering at action-syntax. The brain is "about actions" and lacks representations.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44203562

AlphaFold is optimization, not thinking. Propaganda 'r us.

Symbols and binary will never get us to

"I believe that artificial general intelligence (AGI) is achievable."

And the problem is circular: as the Riley Verge piece citing Fedorenko https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46072838 exhibits, words aren't related to thoughts. And do the thought experiment, neither are symbols, math, binary. They're all factorized, linear models of real events, which are manifold, nested, scale invariant, in other words, analog correlations.

AGI isn't solvable under these current technologies.

The nativist cog-sci program doesn't run in our heads or externalized. It's false.

Sorry, pre frontal cortex.

The key is that there is no content to thought. It's all nested oscillations. It can't be extracted as symbols, so there is no connection between them. Words play the role of a sportscaster reading the minds of the players by observing their behavior. How accurate are they or are we about ourselves? Not very.

Language may ultimately be maladaptive as it is arbitrary and disconnected from thought. Who cares about the gibberish of logic/philosophy when survival is at stake in ecological balance? The key idea is, there are events. They are real. The words we use are false/inaccurate externalizations of those events. Words and symbols are bottlenecks that place the events out of analog reach but fool us by our own simulation processes into thinking they are accurate.

Words are essentially very poor forms of interoception or metacognition. They "explain" our thoughts to us by fooling us. Yet how much of the senses/perceptions are accessible in consciousness. Not very much. The computer serves to further the maladaption by both accelerating the symbols and sutomating them, which puts the initial real events even further from reach. The only game is how much we can fool the species through the lowres inputs the PFC demands. This appears to be a sizable value center for Silicon Valley, and it seems to require coders to ignore the whole of experience and rely solely on the bottleneck simulations centers of the PFC which themselves are disconnected from direct sensory access. Computers, 'social' media, AI, code, VR essentially "play" the PFC.

How these basic thought experiments that have been tested in cog neuroscience since the 90s in the overthrow of the cog sci models of the 40s-80s were not taught as primer classes in AI and comp sci is beyond me. It takes now third gen neurobiology crossed with linguistics to set the record straight.

These are not controversial ideas now.

As there are no symbols in our brains, using symbols as transport for 'intelligence' is oxymoronic. Symbols are the bottleneck to intelligence, not the referential or representation of it. This is basic stuff, folks. The brain doesn't 'store information' it just does stuff and as a byproduct it uses differences held in a library (the allocortex) for the action-memory (cortex).

"No inference is theory neutral"

exactly

It's not evolutionary, that's functionality. There are no algorithms in nature.

Evolution is a tinkering process that finds by selection, and functionality is what we post-hoc add to the success.

Anything reduced to symbols is simply functionality within models, to claim it's creative is illusory. Creativity, imagination, etc exist in a realm beyond, and preceding symbols, metaphors, etc. Creativity is 'thinking around symbolic bottlenecks'.

The matrix multiplication breakthrough is still under the glass ceiling symbols provide. A new way to do math isn't the same as visual scale invariant paradoxes. It's not creativity, the word is a metaphor, the closer word is optimization.

Whatever gets predicted by tokens gets summarized by symbols, which are artifacts of language. This gets to the illusory aspects of binary as well, the rabbit hole goes deep.

Intelligence is wordless. Basic fact. And words are used in the aftermath of thought/intelligence, not prior. They are aftereffects, not effects. Words have no prior. That's a big problem.

Keep in mind there are events, they are real. Words are just symbols we use to make the thoughts or the events cohere as memories, but they're artifacts that have no direct connection to the thoughts. Nor do any tokens, symbols, codes, etc. These are bottlenecks. They have no analog, they lack specificity. Creativity is the ecological exchange between body and ecology to make records that engage paradox wordlessly.

That's what the article's big reveal is about. The events (which can be externalized creatively) are not really creative as words. That's a big problem for the species in general. That's a glass ceiling no one is recognizing or taking notice of. And that sort of gives you an idea how poetry and code are trapped behind it.

LLMs can't innovate form. And form/format innovation is the core of creativity. Neither can RL or frontier. That's creativity, the ability to sense wordless states beyond existing status quo cause effect exchanges. Tokens have no game here. It's that simple, it's how cutting-edges are broken through. It's always trapped behind the aesthetics input, that's just another fatal blow to it's ability to create.

I'm not concerned with "hundreds" of people's opinions. And stories, poems, these are dead/dying forms.

You may be on the creativity camp, stay there. It's generic as creativity. From my POV, someone building a hybrid between game and movies, this tech is dead dull artifactual, like a fossilized version of art.

Yes of course we have definitions of creativity, see Anna Abraham. "creativity is doing something unique and new, using existing networks for things they weren't designed for"

And we have the wordless processes that materialze as affinities and events in the imagination.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41583-019-0202-9

I'm very struck by coders who are neither engineers, scientists, nor creatives in the arts, yet have the false intuition and self-delusion that this code is creative. Nonsense.

I'm afraid LLMs have zilch in comprable abilities to both as they exclude words, symbols, tokens etc.

The contraction of events and the semantic residue, into tokens, symbols, metaphors, sentences, images, segments, parameterized in any way shape/form, is irrelevant next to the semantic load the event contains in a variety of analog states.

No creativity emerges from this, just the mimicry of the tokens, symbols in their reduced, modeled parameters.

That's the problem with LLMs and frontiers, RL. It's all subject to the bottlenecks of math and symbols.

The analog load of semantic (use tasks, actions, variance, scales), the immensity of the nested forms these take between brain, body, screen, canvas, aren't replicable as creation.

It's not information or stimuli we engage with, these are convenient false reductions we're realizing are inconvenient. There's much more the brain, eye detect in reflection. The words and symbols are an aftereffect the computer detects on its way to disregarding the events.

We see this aftereffect as creativity, thinking, etc only as a clever illusion the words, tokens hand us. Nothing more.

Evidence? Plomin isn't some slouch, and the paper's from 2014.

Why is someone from Costa Rica sending US antivax propaganda posts into HN? These are the same poorly defined and badly executed narrative arguments that mythologize vaccine science from conspiracy theorists.

Watson was vastly simplifying genomics, as is this letter. To grasp the details requires knowledge of class, culture, nutrition, and genomics.

https://www.nature.com/articles/mp2014105

in other words, eugenics. we have a culling policy like in early animal domestication: herding pens outside the city walls to test whether infected animals are dangerous. only here, the culling is in the open society, without any advance warnings, which are suppressed from public knowledge as policy. it's far more dystopian than the hunger games.