I love how whenever trans issues come up, it's always this "What is a woman?" "Biological woman" "single sex spaces" bs. Meanwhile, the average trans person is stuck waiting literally three fucking years to access an initial appointment at a gender clinic, with sweet fuck all being done about it.
I heard this once back in 2011 while driving alone through the country at night. Just a weird, pulsing hum. Then it vanished just as quickly as it started. It's funny that people have been studying it for so long and still have no idea what causes it.
Eggs, bacon, hash browns, and toast with jam. I've been out of eggs for a while, so decided to celebrate finally making it to the shops with a small feast!
Dear Rimmer, we're going on a fishing holiday to that ocean planet we passed two days ago. We tried to wake you, but couldn't. See you in three days, L, K and C.
I'm really hoping that the gap tree felling leads to more of an outcry and legislation against this sort of thing. In ancient Briton, trees were sacred. It's high time we brought some of that mindset back.
There'd be an inevitable moment where you get up in the night for a glass of water, walk into the family room, and just see a blackened Elvis staring up at you.
Thank you then! It seems like our debate stemmed from different definitions. Based on your definition of what constitutes AI, Data would absolutely count. By my definition, he is too advanced to be in the same category. But I get the impression that we would both agree that he is more advanced than any modern AI system. Once again, I'm sorry for coming across as condescending; I will have to choose my words more carefully in the future!
This seems to have descended into a debate on "what is consciousness", which as I originally said, is a question that isn't easy to answer. My point was that modern AI inherrently isn't aware of what it's saying, not that it couldn't be defined as an intelligence. As far as I know, there's no solid evidence to prove that it can. To finish, I would like to apologise if my initial comment came across as condescending. I didn't mean to come across as such.
While I appreciate the philosophical take, it seems that you've misunderstood what AI is.
Have you ever been typing out a text and seen that your phone is recommending a list of words for you to select next? This is an example of AI. Your phone has been programmed with a list of words and a set probablility of one word following the other. For instance, if you type "I", it will almost certainly suggest "am", because there's a high probabibility of that being correct. More advanced AI, like ChatGPT work the same way, only on a grander scale. It has no idea what its words mean, but through clever programming can create the illusion that it does.
Data on the other hand is explicitly stated to have a human-like consciousness. His posotronic brain is no different than a human brain, besides being artificial.
Naturally, this brings up the age old philosophical debate on "what actually is consciousness". The simple answer is that we still don't have a good explanation. You could argue that humans also follow an algorithm, just far more advanced, but I would argue that this doesn't satisfactorily explain how humans are able to extrapolate their own ideas from abstract concepts.
Since I haven't seen them listed yet:
I love how whenever trans issues come up, it's always this "What is a woman?" "Biological woman" "single sex spaces" bs. Meanwhile, the average trans person is stuck waiting literally three fucking years to access an initial appointment at a gender clinic, with sweet fuck all being done about it.
I heard this once back in 2011 while driving alone through the country at night. Just a weird, pulsing hum. Then it vanished just as quickly as it started. It's funny that people have been studying it for so long and still have no idea what causes it.
There's something really funny about Cruella accusing Sunak of betraying the public on policies that the public never asked for.
Eggs, bacon, hash browns, and toast with jam. I've been out of eggs for a while, so decided to celebrate finally making it to the shops with a small feast!
Garak is calm because he knows that they're in the justice zone, where it's impossible to commit a crime.
Dear Rimmer, we're going on a fishing holiday to that ocean planet we passed two days ago. We tried to wake you, but couldn't. See you in three days, L, K and C.
Yes I know. But it was listed as a one bedroom house, which it decidedly is not.
There was confidence in Sunak's promises?
If this is their holiday property, I feel bad for them.
I'm honestly not sure what the typical asking price is for a changing booth, but it's definitely not a one bedroom house.
It's a changeing shed listed as a one bedroom house for £25,000. I'm not sure what's reasonable about that.
I'm really hoping that the gap tree felling leads to more of an outcry and legislation against this sort of thing. In ancient Briton, trees were sacred. It's high time we brought some of that mindset back.
Don't hold your breath. He didn't actually say anything about his rewrite other than "better".
I'm not sure why you thought the US system applied. We're talking about a British comedian on /c/United Kingdom, on a UK instance.
There'd be an inevitable moment where you get up in the night for a glass of water, walk into the family room, and just see a blackened Elvis staring up at you.
I didn't realise what community this was at first and was very concerned about OP!
Thank you then! It seems like our debate stemmed from different definitions. Based on your definition of what constitutes AI, Data would absolutely count. By my definition, he is too advanced to be in the same category. But I get the impression that we would both agree that he is more advanced than any modern AI system. Once again, I'm sorry for coming across as condescending; I will have to choose my words more carefully in the future!
This seems to have descended into a debate on "what is consciousness", which as I originally said, is a question that isn't easy to answer. My point was that modern AI inherrently isn't aware of what it's saying, not that it couldn't be defined as an intelligence. As far as I know, there's no solid evidence to prove that it can. To finish, I would like to apologise if my initial comment came across as condescending. I didn't mean to come across as such.
While I appreciate the philosophical take, it seems that you've misunderstood what AI is.
Have you ever been typing out a text and seen that your phone is recommending a list of words for you to select next? This is an example of AI. Your phone has been programmed with a list of words and a set probablility of one word following the other. For instance, if you type "I", it will almost certainly suggest "am", because there's a high probabibility of that being correct. More advanced AI, like ChatGPT work the same way, only on a grander scale. It has no idea what its words mean, but through clever programming can create the illusion that it does.
Data on the other hand is explicitly stated to have a human-like consciousness. His posotronic brain is no different than a human brain, besides being artificial.
Naturally, this brings up the age old philosophical debate on "what actually is consciousness". The simple answer is that we still don't have a good explanation. You could argue that humans also follow an algorithm, just far more advanced, but I would argue that this doesn't satisfactorily explain how humans are able to extrapolate their own ideas from abstract concepts.