And it’s not like servers have gotten harder to run! Pirates serve terabytes of data that’s straight-up illegal! Your fuckin’ commercial connection should be plenty for any damn thing you want.

I don’t give a shit what children see.

They’ll live.

Stop spying on adults.

Reporting live from Weinerville.

Good taste?

As opposed to which course of action where they wouldn’t say those things?

Who could possibly give a shit?

Art belongs to its audience.

People have a right to culture.

When they ruled!

Like calling all e-mail “spam.”

Is there a point explaining what the N in NP-Complete means, when you’re just gonna ignore two-thirds of a much simpler comment?

If you demand determinism, it’s just matrix algebra. Randomness is optional. It makes them work better. They run on your normal-ass computer, a deterministic Turing machine.

I categorically do not claim determinism is necessary for consciousness or intelligence. I ask you, again: are you deterministic?

Slide rule.

Argumentum ad webster is shite philosophy. Only an explanation of consciousness in terms of unconscious events could explain consciousness.

LLMs could obviously be deterministic - they add randomness because it’s useful. Matrix algebra is not intrinsically stochastic.

What other intelligent entity can you name, that’s purely deterministic? Why is that a precondition? Why is it even relevant?

No one in my family ever uses a garage as anything but an attached shed.

Between the driver’s door and the B pillar. We had some “bug freeze” spray that fucks up their joints.

Okay. So what’s the difference between a model of thinking and literally doing it?

You can say it’s different from how people do it. But a calculator doesn’t multiply the way students do. In mathematics and Turing machines, any process that gets the right answer is the same.

The motherfuckers that set up shop inside my car definitely had the ability to sting humans.

About the only time I can drop an unironic “source: my ass.”

Right, because nothing important in life is ambiguous or approximate.

Does that razor let you say anything at all about intelligence or consciousness, given that neither has a rigid, formal, or universal definition?

If the metric is ‘see, it does the thing,’ then a model which demonstrates thought would not be pretending to think.

Fuck no. It is only because of the Turing test that we can say they’re not conscious. You get someone questioning a bot and a person at the same time, they’re gonna figure out who’s who in short order. See: how many Rs in strawberry, name states without an E, should I walk to the car wash.

If a program was indistinguishable from a person, what basis would we have to say the person is intelligent but the program is not?

Any woman can make a whole new consciousness all by herself, with just a little help from a friend.