Without securing a popular mandate through an election? People are tired of elites rewriting the rules, how exactly is a vanguard going to be viewed as legitimate?

It’s not “bested” by the LLM though, a mathematician used the LLM as a tool to disprove a conjecture. Subtract the mathematicians from the process and the LLM would not have successfully completed the task. It would be more accurate to say a mathematician with an LLM was able to best a mathematician who did not have an LLM. Which is cool, but we don’t need to pretend the LLM is not a tool but something that “understands” math like a mathematician

You are the one collapsing tool use into a binary when there are varying degrees of competency and hand holding.

So why are you allergic to people talking about the quality of the tools in regards to capability?

How are you able to understand it’s capability without understanding what tools it is capable of manipulating to effect?

If you are not interested in how it completes the task then you are not an authority on how it works.

It’s relevant to what the parent was saying about LLMs. The success of the LLM in using mathematical tools does not contradict what they were saying. To then accuse them of lying because of a misunderstanding is… bad form.

Aren’t you the least bit curious what tools they gave the LLM and how the LLM used those tools? It’s like back in math class you are asked to solve a quadratic formula but you forgot how. So you use the calculator to try different numbers and the calculator is telling you if you are getting closer. Sure I got the right answer, but it’s hardly a testament to my math skills.

Gates asked Epstein for what kind of antibiotics he could slip his wife without her knowing to treat STDs (allegedly, i don’t want to get sued)

You know the “DeepMind and OpenAi models” is the hint that the LLM model is not the one doing the math. The LLM provides a hypothesis and the DeepMind model provides grounding or feedback on whether the hypothesis even makes sense or works.

Using computers to search for a counter example to a conjecture isn’t exactly new ground and I suspect they did so with the aide of some harness tweaks like some numerical LSP. Like cool, it pushed the envelope but like what the parent said, they grafted on the ability to do a specific task.

Fair enough. The crux of my argument is self awareness is an evolutionary trait for evolutionary purposes. If you sim/emulate the same processes in a different environment then it does not serve the evolutionary purposes of the organism, its definitionally not self awareness. To put it another way, the system doing the simulation is less efficient then the thing it is simulating. And energy efficiency is part of what self awareness delivers to an evolutionary system. To be clear I am not ruling out a machine can be aware of its own economy as part of making it intelligent, I am just saying a simulation distorts the very economy that self awareness is to operate on.

Being self aware of myself and my surroundings but not aware of the entire world does not make me not self aware. Same as an entity in a simulation could potentially be self aware but not aware of being in a simulation.

Let’s take this to it’s full conclusion to see why this is not a meaningful distinction. I am not even aware of every cell in my own body, you don’t even need to make reference to the outside world to argue we are not self aware. This line of reasoning makes self-awareness a rather meaningless word.

And stating why I think the simulation hypothesis is not adequate is not the same as disregarding, even if I didn’t fully explain the reasons.

I’m just saying you could use theory to make a better argument then “libs eat cock”. I believe in you

*Democrat Socialists

Sure, and how do you know your thoughts are your own? Like if you have to defend your position by questioning the nature of reality then you got bigger problems.

Just another terminally online ML ignoring material conditions and doing the woke scolding that libs love to do.

Go read what Turing proposed, it is a lot more complex then how it is often parroted. There are many more tests that the latest models would not pass, like explaining poetry (that it was not trained on)

I see the point that the LLM is closer to a 1bit perceptron then it is to the brain?

A simulation that isn’t aware that it is a simulation is not self-aware, which is a qualitative difference from what is being simulated. Consciousness isn’t like some rom you can emulate.