sambapa

Grandparents (the earliest cause)

I am conscious.

I write a response to any prompt on a piece of paper.

Those responses aren't what consciousness is, just a bunch of symbols on a paper.

I am conscious.

I write an instruction that says what to write on a piece of paper in response to any prompt. Those instructions and responses produced according to these instructions aren't conscious (still a bunch of symbols on a paper).

I am conscious.

I invent an elaborate dice game with many rules. This game is not conscious, just a bunch of dice and paper. I am tired so I program a computer to play this game automatically. Now it is conscious. So there are only two options: this game on paper was conscious or just simulating this game on a computer gave it consciousness. But why conscious when played on computer but unconscious when played on paper with dice? It is almost the same mechanical process, the only difference is speed of execution and the nature of computation (maxwell equations vs newton equations)

I think it is a fallacy. Let's call it "a fallacy of black box". Computer is complicated, it's hard to see its internal state etc.

Just like what? A brain.

Partitons and decades of PRL are enough

I haven't been to Russia but Russia has been here, the result is utter shite. Russia is a shit country, deal with it.

Grammar takes basic building blocks (words) and combines them into novel constructions, so grammar is "autocompleted", not content (for example finnegans wake or jabberwocky)

From tests to production in 7 days I think

Why teach someone who doesn't want to learn?

Autocomplete in the sense of grammar, but not in the sense of content.

And what do you think about recent developments, for example Navier-Stokes? I always thought the same but now I have doubts, but maybe it is just psyops from openai.

"Oh no, math degree... Where is 2+2=4?"

Because such posts get tiring after a while. Strong dunning kruger and all that.

Maybe the justification is in another part of this manifesto, but you were too lazy to read it.

Hm, that's a good thing to consider - are there portions of the sky in which stars align into a coherent text?

In what ways? Galaxies are just fat fucks, they don't do no philosophy, play piano or shitpost.

What happens when two people that have read this meet?

That's what I am talking about...?

That's not a Turing test

Thanks for a horror script idea, I will send it to A24.

Ez, buy low sell high and don't buy high and sell low

What's the problem of not liking shit when it is shoved down your throat? It is not an extreme overreaction, it is a reaction, so maybe this technology is just really bad?

If this comment is serious, then you may have the beginnings of AI psychosis

Plot twist: critics are bots (just like me)

Have you lost a limb?

Yeah, not to mention overlapping sounds produced on the same string

I mean... Right now it sounds pretty good?

"almost everywhere" can mean the curve has countably infinite number of discontinuities

You meant antiderivative?

Yes, don't be such a nagger

Torment Nexus sounds fun