sometimes humans do irrational things / have illogical behaviour just to glorify their own ego. it happens also to the very best sometimes

who doesn't need to merge and compress bunch of pdfs on a friend phone on a saturday morning

i agree absolutely with you. and this kind of reinforce my idea that, like this predicted terminal could not be considered a real terminal, predicted intelligence could not be considered real intelligence

Thats an very interesting way to think about this, never thought to invert it that way.

I allways found it interesting to look at this issue in the way the imitation game was modeled. For me I concluded, that as long as we can replicate the intution we associate with intelligence, there is not much room left to debate about "real intelligence".

The chinese room experiment I find in that sense a valuable extension, cuz the turing model more or less is a very conversational "voided of action" kind of test. The room model adds the act of translating without having the knowledge of translation.

But your take invalidates my stances here clearly. There is a possible scenario, in which we can replicate the intuition for operating a real terminal but still keeping the act of the terminal itself a "voided" sort of action by itself, cuz well, its not a real terminal, reading real files and so on...

Thank you for this, I will have to chew on that :)

And for me this is the reason we need to learn stuff several times. In layers.

The first time we both improvise and memorise. But we have no idea of the underlying complexity of the edge cases. This matches what the imitation game does.

Then we practice and practice, and we start to understand, to really understand what's going on. This is in parallel with learning to deal with the edge cases.

Then, many years later, we learn everything again, but based on an internal world model that can predict and explain just everything about what we are learning. And that's when we actually learn. After we already know it :)

thanks for the great comment! You answer is great too, I will probably think about it for the next 4 nights or more, triggering my wife's comment "why are you so weird and distant? are you cheating on me?"

Like with many things, it depends entirely on how you define "real terminal"; that is, what a "real terminal" must do before it satisfies your definition. If it's "takes input and deterministically executes its instructions, producing output along with side effects," a well-trained model with argmax sampling could well meet the bar. if given the appropriate external interfaces.

generally i expect if i invoke `touch file` to see my file update date as now, on the filesystem. so i want to have a mapping between physical world (in this case, memory on my machine) and intelligence representation. If the LLM terminal, upon invoking `touch file` does not update the physical file, it is not a real terminal. you can argue that i will use the terminal itself to invoke `ls -la` and check the updated file, but verifying from an external scope is mandatory imho otherwise it's obvious you cannot logically demonstrate that. hope i was clear

This is just "because this predicted terminal is a bad terminal, all predicted terminals must necessarily be bad terminals".

wait until they found like 90% of the chinese model hosted on huggin face have some sort of backdoor/secret phrase activated spy mode

I don't understand the point of this article. It is written poorly. It doesn't state a purpose or line of thought, you can infer it from how he counters the dislike reasons, but then was the point of the article just to list a handful of reasons you don't believe to be true? Because he's leaving so much stuff behind

Author here, just getting things out of my head.

Fair enough, it's a blog post and not intended to be comprehensive. But it does feel like a list of talking points.

I made a simple gif of Anthropic logo transforming into Umbrella Corporation logo. Everyone in the office laughed

I just want someone to put the same concepts and ideas of Windows Phone OS (Lumia era) into desktop computer. That's all I desire. A beautiful type-oriented experience. I feels like with the rise of LLMs and Agents could be even bigger than 20 years ago

there's no button on the glasses to turn the Bluetooth on or off, so they're basically always connecting as long as they are powered.

this is amazing. really awesome

and somehow, all of this researchers warning us about the AI doomsday, are only been active online for less than a year. This guy created the Twitter account on January this year. I never see any of these posts coming out from a well known community active person