Comment Re:Seems suddenly common (Score 1) 59
Indeed. Such a surprise.
Indeed. Such a surprise.
Weirdly, most of those cases have sprung the requirement on the person by surprise midway into the interview.
Which would cause me to terminate the interview at that moment.
Actual number from people selling insurance: 2.8%, i.e. anbout onr hour per week. That is so low it does not matter.
Hahahaha, no. But some companies that think that will be prematurely going out of business at some time in the future.
Do not apply there and do not depend on their products continuing to work.
Exactly. I have been predicting this for a while as well. One other example: About 35 years ago, Simens in Germany did not hire any new EE graduates for a year. They were hiring a large part of them before. Result? They had trouble getting enough for the next 20 years or so.
Indeed. See countless past and current examples. The thing is that current LLMs are _designed_ to act that way to leverage exactly this effect. The whole thing is a cleverly designed Big Lie and many, many people fall for it.
That is both accurate and not a new insight. The term originally was "better crap" and more modern is "AI slop".
Some people (Daniel Dennett) believe that consciousness is an illusion, an illusion that emerges somehow from the complex, parallel, statistical, machine processing in our brains.
Yep, "somehow". Convincing. To idiots.
Oh, and standard debunking: To have an illusion you need consciousness.
I'm pretty sure that the latest LLMs will very quickly develop the same sense of self that almost all of us humans have, and will be functionally indistinguishable from the rest of us. (Apart from having more knowledge than most humans)
That is because you have no clue, but have some deep desire for this to happen or some deep fear of it. But all that is just a deep delusion.
You fell for the lies by misdirection. If you read actual scientific publications and you know what to look for, no claims of any "concept of mind" or the like are actually made. But with clever wording, people are nudged in the direction of thinking that is what is going on.
Prove that. Unless you do that is simply just speculation stated as fact. Which is _dishonest_.
What you've missed is: that's all you are. You just use different wiring, and a model refined over a longer interval.
Got any proof of that? No, you do not. Because actual Science says that we do not know. What you regurgitate here is called "Physicalism" and it is a bizarre variant of religion.
Actually, given connectivity and density, the human brain seems to be within one order of magnitude the most powerful computing mechanism physically possible. Make it larger and things get slower. The hardware LLMs runs on is much larger.
That is a dead end. Self-driving with spacial awareness has been tried 30-40 years ago. Does not work.
Quantity is no substitute for quality, but its the only one we've got.