0u89e
The main issue that people are thinking of autists, that they are somewhat different from other people - even on biological level and it does not help, that among autistic people there arte those that think in the levels of "autistic nation", because genetically we are even less different to other humans than a lab rat to other rats. And like I mentioned before, spread of succesful autistic genes is irrevelant of the number of direct descendants that person produces, and with genes you can't assume, that they are only present to those that have diagnosis.
There are many things in our build up, where evolution have been outcome from viruses. However I do not like your comparision to cancer - cancerous cells are generally shredding cells from the unity of your organism - they might be making new organism, but that organism is not part of your evolution anymore. Changes that are happening in autistic brains are not destroying brains, but is part of the processes that are changing and optimizing them for the environment they have to exist in and the reasons for those changes are evolutionary - those changes started long time ago. Do you like that or not or can it be worded better - it does not really matter here.
>>>This is just a hypothetical counter-argument. More connectivity could be better, "more intelligent", and autism seems to be "cool" among nerds for this reason. But maybe it's just a fallacy, just a way to pretend to be something better.
You might be new. The mainstream argument and a direction for autistic people where it was going for a very long time has been, that autistic people were mentally disabled(not only intellectual but also emotional), which clearly is not the case. I mean, yes - that attitude might be helpful for purposes to suck out government support, but that leaves autistic people treated like deficient people, that are not contributing to society and telling a talented and intelligent person, that he is mentally disturbed would yield different results than telling that the person is very intelligent. And frankly, the issue is not hypothetical, like you have classified it but autistic people that they are smarter(at some things) stands out in the crowd. Genius and NT at this point in time is oxymoron.
>>>Yesterday I listened to a podcast episode about bird brains [0]. That some birds have a way more efficient brain than ours, even if they are not as intelligent as we are. They are smarter than other primates, but their brain just weighs around 10g, while the one of chimps, which are about as intelligent as some birds, weighs 400g and consumes a lot more energy. They have an underdeveloped cortex, so apparently it isn't as important as one might think. That it could be that the cortex is more dedicated to sensing, than to thinking. Birds, for example, don't have such complex sensory inputs like our hands or our entire skin surface, that "memory mapping" all those inputs requires such a big cortex.
You seem to have somewhat lack of knowledge and mixing things together based on what you know. Bird brains also have "cortex" - they have evolved some parts of brains, that are important to their evolution while we have massivelly developed cerebral cortex even compared to other primates, which is not what you are comparing here. Primates are much more inteligent than birds and if you realy want to go the route of comparing brain size, which you have got wrong, then brain weight to body mass comparision in birds is much lower than that to primates. As for energy that is used to operate brain, I would really need to know what is the evidence of that claim that birds are smarter than primates. It is assumed, that higher energy consumption of brains is because of amount of calculations that are happening in brains and birds brains are no more efficient than human brains - you can't use ostriches as a replacement of a very simple tasks for programming, that even dumb student can do.
The issue that you have declared that cortex is not needed is that it does not change the fact, that the cortex as part of human brains is not going to go away - cerebral cortex have developed over long time and it seems to be going to be foundation for future developments of human brains and also autistic brains. We could even get larger cerebral cortex, but expecting that some other brain regions would develop more than they are(as they also are constantly changing), compared to cerebral cortex is going against the topic, as while there are some changes in other parts of brains, the ones that are in celebral parts are more important to brains of austistic people.
We have wasted so much time in getting over your nonsense, but the information flow of human eyes is massive - the "thinking", that brains are doing is basically in discarding most of information for later processing. Autistic people have overflow of that information because their brains are not behaving "normaly"(like other human brains) and are not discarding as much information as other human brains does but tries to process it all. That is very much evolutionary change and very clearly processing more information has advantages compared to those that does not have them. Generally the things that some people are freaking about overstimulation will go away, as it is part of how changes are happening, but changes that will wire brains differently are there to stay - for all humans eventually.
>>> I struggle to understand language like that when talking to my parents and my brothers and my wife, despite having talked with them more than anyone else in my life. That's not something that most people would struggle with, but it's something that I suspect a lot of autistic people would relate to.
Exactly - I have never fought more battles to dominate than with my relatives. And to be fair the cases where I was getting along was when I fully subjugated to their will.
The issue with communication is not that it is something that is unique to humans, but it is how all the animals are functioning. Other animals are more specialized and their brains are attuned to that specialized behaviour. Autistic peacock that would not understand the requirement for flashy tail would essentially have change in brains that would make it a different peacock species. There are even more trivial differences - fishes that specialize in eating different foods would evolve into different species that would not crossbreed(mostly because they would also evolve different mating rituals). However with humans it is different - while we do not differ on genetical level to be classified as different species, the difference in cultural norms and ceremonial behaviour would make us different species but we can shift and adapt to different cultural environments, so this is something that does not effect us so much, though it still occupies a very large space in our brains.
Anyway, if we are returning to the topic of job interviews, then it has nothing to do with answering the questions correctly - the issue is mainly how would you get along(at least that is what I can extrapolate from successful interviews being in both sides of table). That also applies to other communication fields - generally my understanding with communication failures with other people has come to conclusion that we would not be getting along anyway and the tolerance level from me is not so high and subconciously or even consciously I was the one that was showing disrespect to other person. And that applies to communication between autistic people even more. There is no need to learn answers to these questions at all - if you want to get that route, you are going to set yourself for a failure, because learning questions and how to behave changes rapidly not only among differnt cultures(in a global village that is impossible task), but also among generations... and in the end you need to grow your own backbone, because adapting to virtue signaling(which basically is what society consists) is not how it is done, as you can't run across savanna in a zebra flock avoiding lions all your life. At the end you want for other people to adapt to you or at least acknowledge from hyenas that you are an elephant that wants to eat grass and enjoy the company of other elephants. And at the end we are humans and humans even more than other species want to adapt environment around us - if you are trying to adapt only, including to other humans, this is going to be constant failure. Then again, this might not apply to everyone - my struggles are trying to dominate over other people obviously and I have not even decided if that is really something I require.
but fair enough - was not aware of rules that have expressively pointed what is not accepted
PS The title of article is on a clickbait level, as the meaning for images nowadays does not correspond to what is used in article.
If it comes to games, they have nearly 0 value and they can disappear - that would not change the value of the game, as they are derivative works and not the ones that are leaving influence. They have hardly any representation of culture around the game, and those who does not talk can be easily replaced with AI playthrough, so I would not care that much. Also, we are forgetting that gamers enjoy to discover new things - and those let's plays are there for a different reason - to stake a place of being there as the main source to generate income from ads and they are aimed at long investments, so they won't disappear as soon as I would like.
Honestly, you should change your statements for other people, as by default I assumed, that you were serious... I'm being sarcastic here - have to add this as people do not hear sarcastic tone in text and assume it to be serious.
Also, what makes you think I did not try it for code? It did not generate code, that I found acceptable to me and required a lot more work. But at least it gave me honest answer there, that it could offer links to better papers. I don't see that much difference with ChatGPT, as they might probably allow more queries to paying customers, but on the other side - did I mentioned that I read TOS? I would never use AI tools to create my own code for commercial use, that is not open source. Because why in the right mindd should I do that?
I eventually got bored with this tool, just ike with ChatGPT(also, I can write better code anyway, so not real use to me now). Code is not as important as data which is the basis of programming. And I am still interested in understanding logic of other programmers, when I see a code(and behaviour of their creation), that I have to ask wth were they thinking. And test it more.
I am a human, that can programm and I will ask political questions first, because morality and politics are affecting my efficiency as a programmer. If I can't think freely, I won't work on that. So, unless you are a CCP shill and not concerned that your code and logics is recorded and eventually can be stolen, you can use whatever.
Robotics - is nowhere near the promise as well - we are nowhere near biological entities(not made from metal) with syntetic brains, not to mention biological robotic arms that humans can use as prostetics while they are regrowing natural limbs. So much to learn.
As for the Jesus. That is not really a deep subject. We know what Jesus was as a human - his real life and his violent and human nature(as a military representative of cult, that was lead by John the Baptist) has nothing to do with how it is portrayed by religion. History of how Christianity started and including about Jesus was one of the easiest problems that I have encountered and wished to know and I fullfilled just recently.
How any of this can be considered inconsiderate? Is there any internal policy, that Chinese, including AI companies have been forbidden to talk about Russia - current situational ally(that Chinese denies) - potentially future victim of Chinese invasion in next few years, when Russia will crumble apart? Given that my mind works slightly different than other people, why do I have to come to conclusion that topics about Russia are raising very big red flag? Nothing of this is in Tos. And - no I am not bullying AI in any way. Just asking very simple questions, that are not unreasonable.
PS I had to go through the list of prophecies that deepseek gave me - there was nothing about Russia there. It is so simple - that should be the answer. But I am happy that I went through some of those prophecies and found out that probably all of them are made up to serve whatever agenda was needed at the moment, so they were always fabricated.
If you are going with the approach, that silence is also an answer, then yes they can be considered as results, just as receiving complete garbage to known facts.
PS Edit: Btw, I've read Tos before using deepseek
PS Western models are also censored - if not by law, then self-censored, but the issue is for me is not censorship but being in dark what and why is being censored. Where do you learn about those additional unwritten laws? And are those really applicable to me outside of China or does companies decide that their laws are above laws of other countries?
However, the issue with Life is that God is only human made concept and not all human societies have that concept as well.
PS Also, there are many opportunists, that were burning their houses to receive insurance or compensations, so not all of those houses were burned by wildfires. It all looks ugly, regadless from what angle you look, because if there is no responsibility - even from the ones that have taken upon resposibility, then catastrophe is expected - sooner than later.
LUCA is considered anaerobic - any contact with oxygen would have killed it. However we do not know what were preRNA Life forms.
>>>However that is wrong, because without a continuous source of energy all those organic substances will stay dead forever.
Unless they are getting frozen and put on pause, like all the stable chemical ingredients can exist in your household.
>>>The only suitable continuous source of energy is the internal heat of big enough planets, which will not cool quickly, because capturing the energy of stellar light requires very complex structures that cannot be generated spontaneously, but they can be only the result of a long evolution of already existing life forms.
The only known life, that is known to me that can process stellar light are plants and animals, that have eaten plants and are getting sugar from their cells, that are integrated into their organism.
I am not sure what this text was compiled together from, but most of chemical processes that are happening on any planet does not require any stellar light. Initially all of matter was part of a Sun and when it went Supernova, it involved some stellar light, but after that, no need for that.
>>>The main source of energy for the first life forms must have been the conversion of free hydrogen (dihydrogen) and carbon monoxide and/or dioxide into acetic acid (acetogenesis). An auxiliary source of energy could have been the gradient of ions that exists in hydrothermal vents. Both sources of energy have their origin in the oxidation of volcanic rocks by water, and the energy comes ultimately from the internal heat of the planet (because the volcanic rocks formed at high temperatures, where they are in chemical equilibrium, are no longer in chemical equilibrium in the presence of water after they cool to lower temperatures). At least for now, there is no known mechanism for the appearance of life elsewhere than on a planet with water, internal heat and volcanism.
This also looks like something compiled from different thoughts. But, ok - in terms of Life originating on the planet, this is only more or less applicable to evolutionary stage of Life, that happened on our planet in thermal vents, and only when planet was stable enough for a Life to exist there as we have no idea if Life was on our planet already, before Theia merged into our planet and destroyed everything organic, which seems to have been the case. But the issue here is not so much if Life originated on our planet, but where all the previous organic forms evolved, which are considered much older than our planet and primordal soup that is needed to create Life simply could not have happened in thermal vent like you are supposing.
From what I have read, comets are excellent places for primordal soup to happen as one of the prerequisites for a Life. Whenever they are approaching Sun, there is water boiling and all the processes that are similar to what thermal vents would have, but with light in addition and plentiful of resources for Life to spring. Like I mentioned earlier, freezing over would not reverse chemical processes that ere happening during that boiling and in next approach they would continue and there is basically indefinite time for those cycles to happen and disperse whatever end products that were happening on comets whenever they were passing plants - not to mention if they would land on them. There is life, that can exist in atmosphere, so there is actually no need for a comet to hit a planet to disperse product from their primordial soup. So, generally comets are one of the stages for prereq of Life, where explosion of Suns to disperse their thermonuclear product is previous stage. There seems to be impossible for Life not to appear the way how Universe functions.
PS I am not challenging RNA stuff, but Life also includes preRNA Life, so while your POV in regards to RNA based Life seems to be ok, everything outside of those boundaries are not ok.
But frankly, this paper is not about captured females(which btw are more uniformly spread across whole Europe, so their capture even in Southern Europe would not radically add anything new to a Scandinavian female gene pool), when it specifically mentions whole populations coming to Scandinavia from Central Europe. It is differences in males that really make distinctive population groups.