lfmunoz4

Penrose is saying a computer cannot understand / has no intelligence, and the incompleteness theorem proves this. Think in terms of the semantics (the meaning) of what the AI is outputting. The incompleteness theorem proves it does not understand and can never understand the semantics. It operates at the syntax level. How can something operating at the syntax level be intelligent? All it can do is look at symbols and rearrange them. There are algorithms to categorize and give these symbols (tokens/words) weights etc but all it can do is rearrange symbols. Do humans re-arrange symbols, no, they understand. They experience the color red, but to a computer the color red is a number. What is the connection between the number for red and the color red? AI pretty much collects every instance of red and in some sense approximates what red actually is.

Not sure what the point you are making is? Should we just keep going back in history and try to cherry pick events to blame and justify current conflicts? That can go on indefinitely and is why we keep having wars.

Do you remember what happened when Russia tried to install missiles in Cuba? The USA put its foot down and was willing to have a nuclear war. Same thing is happening in Russia, making Ukraine part of NATO is just too close. Why is it so hard for people to understand this?

I was trying to say that the average american does care, but the average politician does not care. But the point is that recently there has been a reason to pretend to care. i.e, to oppose dodge. They need a reason to oppose dodge and concerned for privacy has that "for the people" tone to it. So the insane part is how a cause like privacy suddenly is important when there is a political need for it to be important, i.e, to find a reason to oppose dodge. When the opposing party is trying to solve a problem you as a politician you need to oppose it. It doesn't matter if it is good or bad. You as the opposing party need to find the bad side of it. And the reason cannot be "I am in the opposing party" or "because I want to be the one to solve the problem". It has to be a possible real reason. So which came first actual concern for privacy or the need to be concerned for privacy. Clearly the need to be concerned for privacy. This kind of why two party system works, because you always have someone opposing what you are doing even if it is right, just to keep it in check.

Okay so you care, do you think politicians who are now pretending to be concerned for privacy reasons care? Think the average american realizes that they have never cared about privacy and they look like clowns pretending like all the sudden they do.

This kind of thinking is what leads to zero progress. Also I think most people will be surprised how unless a lot of the data is compared to private sector data. I.e, in 2017 Equifax leaked data on 150 million people and no one cared (you get a free 6month credit check). That data went to foreign governments and private databases and it is easy to access on darkweb so real actual scammers and criminals have it. Millions of people were targeted for scamming because of this. That is just ONE leak. Now imagine the amount of data Visa has on your for example, all your purchases. Apps that have collected your browsing history and actual GPS location. Don't think this data isn't sold and combined with other databases. There are companies that just collect data and buy data. And you are worried about 1 database with people given explicit access makes me think the real objection is something else.

Is this article written by AI? Seems poorly written, few real details and substance, short so that it is within its context window. More like trying to market instead of report.

For me cannabis 100 percent effects sleep. You should determine that for yourself, which quite easy to do by keeping a dream journal for 1 month on weed and completely free from weed. That for me is reason enough not to do it. Sleep in critical for high performance, for many people sleep might not be the limiting factor but it is likely a huge factor to being at your best each day.

My understanding is that not having H100s is irrelevant because most Chinese companies can partner or just own companies in say Australia that can load up on H100s in their data centers in Australia and "rent them out" or offer a service to the Chinese parent company.

Agree that US is at a disadvantage for innovation because of lawsuits, wonder if it will eventually lead to US becoming 2nd place of innovation.

They got cameras now

Might be a projection, i.e, you think teens do drugs to be cool. My group of friends we were legit curious read books like The Doors of Perceptions where we thought we would meet God or Aliens travel to astrospace. Any recent books like that? That made teens curious about drugs?