blamestross

The primary value of a LLM is automated intellectual property laundering.

To a certain extent yes, the subsidies that enable dumb use cases will go away. The capacity will remain, but who would bother?

Scifi made the "computer voice and cold personality" for a reason, it fit our model of what it would be.

I think that could be OK, or a similar very intentional coding of "you are talking to a machine" personality+affect. The only real limit is accessibility damage by over-limiting the interactions.

Yes... I think they very clearly do. The key words in your reply "need 'practice'".

Just because they choose not to, and it isn't normalized, doesn't mean it isn't a good idea. Especially as a SWE where about 90% of my "humanlike conversation" is an agent harness I run all day.

We should be practicing and intentionally talking to real people. Otherwise things will get.. weird in undesired ways.

I'd argue for saying "thank you" to inanimate objects on occasion, it is good practice for when talking to humans.

I think there is a deep cultural danger of human-like-conversational machines training us to talk to humans like machines. Plus, they work better if we feed them human-conversation-like sequences.

We already spend as little consciousness as we can get away with.

Most of conciousness's effort is working itself out of a job, making plans to train the nonconcious bits of the brain to do jobs. Training and kicking off mental simulations.

In more intelligent folks, that learning and training often becomes a non-conscious behavioral pattern itself. I study and learn mostly non-consciously. I was trained how to.

I think most people spend most of the time as philosophical zombies and that isn't something to be scared of.

When I end up needing hearing aids, I intend to roll my own signal remapping via Bluetooth. Latency will be a thing, it will be worse than state of the art, but I can adjust and fix it.

My capacity to do that is rare, and it is not a public health solution.

A bill of bodily autonomy with prosthetics (no subscriptions, no self destruct or planned shutdown) and right to repair prosthetics seems like the path for the future.

Yeah, this test is poor. Turing test broke a while ago. Blindsight was written while it was still considered a thing. One of it's limitations.

I think if he had argued that consciousness was a "transitional power source for intelligent behavior" it would all be cleaner. It is and was useful, but eventually becomes a bottleneck.

> So it turns out I'm not conscious either

That is an option. I think we are philosophical zombies a decent chunk of the time. Constant self awareness and mindfulness are calorically expensive. No reason consciousness has to be continuous.

I kinda view Lithium batteries as road flares with good PR. So that inside my body next to my brain seems..sketchy.

The other issue is that cutting it out and replacing it is the only option when the battery dies or goes wrong. If the product/company dies in the meantime, you have a bunch of scar tissue and no hearing. Replacing the "normally inside" bits of a cochlear implant is really high risk of not working as intended, so changing brands isn't a small ask. You really get to do this once. So putting the processor inside and tightly integrated with the nerve stimulation seems inadvisable. At least with the processor separated, you have a chance a compatible replacement processor could be made and exchanged without huge risks.

I think people really wish AGI required consciousness or unbounded self improvement.

My hope for this era, is that humanity accepts the reality that the human mind has limits. Limits of attention, memory, and persistence. Then we will stop blaming people for things beyond any reasonable capacity they could carry.

I have a IV port implant. The needles to use with it are licensed and very tightly controlled. It's not a prosthetic, but it is a part of my body I can't actually use without a company's permission.