Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | zwischenzug's commentslogin

How do we know that that isn't essentially how our minds work?

It probably is, but the difference is that the signals are happening in a persons and not a gpu.

Evidence for that? I remember there was a guy who worked for google that quit because he thought an LLM was conscious and we needed to talk about its rights, but that's the only example I am aware of.

It's a great story, and a nicely written piece.

But civilisations have always forgotten things and then had to re-engineer them. We only recently recreated Roman-equivalent concrete; knowledge required to create the Saturn V rockets had to be re-engineered; we can't recreate medieval stained glass exactly, or Viking Ulfberht Swords; we would struggle to create Betamax tape today.

Many of the examples I found (as expected) relate to military or commercially sensitive technology that did not get written down (for obvious reasons).

It also reminded me when I read Thomas Thwaites' "The Toaster Project: Or a Heroic Attempt to Build a Simple Electric Appliance from Scratch", where to make a smelter from scratch he relied on a 450 year old book ("De re metallica" by Georgius Agricola), as well as a friendly Metallurgist.

We already lost the widespread ability to write assembler in an artisinal way. Now we have AI we will also be lazy about how we write individual bits of artisinal code. So what? Yes it will cost more (in time and money) when we need to re-engineer, but how much would it cost to keep alive all the knowledge and skills we might possibly need in the future?

We had better make sure we write down and preserve the recorded data though :)


Similarly, I did group therapy for a few years, and found it highly and profoundly rewarding.

It's much more structured, with a facilitator to help reduce the possibility of dangerous behaviours. It forced me to confront aspects of myself I otherwise might never have. It also (I think) gave me greater insight into what might be behind people's public faces.


Everything I've known anything about first hand has been utterly garbled - or was completely made up - when written up in Private Eye.


The first sentence makes no sense.


You cannot live by thinking alone.


You can only live by thinking. It's how you experience the world and how you move yr limbs.


Says who? Trillionaire capitalist overlords?


Isn't that because of posix?


Powershell is not posix compliant and does not pretend to be. Like conditionals using `()` instead of `[]` is already a clear departure from posix


Don't know if this is definitive, but:

https://www.johndcook.com/powershell.html#:~:text=The%20core...

POSIX Korn shell, specifically, according to Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerShell#Grammar

so maybe it inherited 2>&1 from Korn shell, which in turn was POSIX.

But yeah, Powershell was not built purely to be a POSIX shell, but I thought it tried to be compatible where it made sense (hence the seeming clash of cultures).


I don't think they were talking about pwsh? pwsh actually has types and is its own programming lang unlike *sh, so it doesn't rely on builtin command exit codes.


If you place a sports bet online, odds (!) are that it will run through tcl in its business logic. I may even have written some of it.


Engineers can definitely contribute to the problem too, in my experience.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: