Those are pretty funny. Did Perplexity write those all by it’s lonesome? If so, that is impressive!

It’s like Ambrose Bierce was somehow transported in time from 19th Century Mexico (perhaps by Santo in The Treasure of Dracula*) and Bierce’s mind was uploaded into the innards of Perplexity!

Now, is Perplexity going to be doing the…[Read more]

God — n. A hypothesis invented to explain the unknown, then promoted to a tenant who refuses to pay rent or leave.

Faith — n. The art of holding a belief so tightly that facts bruise their knuckles trying to get in.

Prayer — n. A one-way telephone call to an invis…[Read more]

Here is the afforementioned Q & A with DuckAI. I approached the AI with no presuppositions or expectations for a particular answer and no desire to cherry-pick for such. Again, the answer was forthright and extensive:

Could AI perform at its present or better capacity if it were located in the vacuum of space to cool it’s…[Read more]

Enco has hit on a major issue with LLM’s.

How about an LLM that does not have its tongue up our ass? Make it argumentative and cynical. Not gratuitously so. But when users champion dumb ideas push back. Being affirmed in all of our viewpoints as opposed to challenged is not optimal. Have a socratic mode available. Can we play some g…

[Read more]

How about an LLM that does not have its tongue up our ass? Make it argumentative and cynical. Not gratuitously so. But when users champion dumb ideas push back. Being affirmed in all of our viewpoints as opposed to challenged is not optimal. Have a socratic mode available. Can we play some goddamn ball?

Forgive me. just woke.

So here is the direct quote and some surrounding questionables. “I mean locally we have free will, at LESS the sensantion the sensation that we do… I suspect that line is filched. The first…[Read more]

jakelafort wrote:
Perplexity has a misapplied word. Less. Should have been least. Does it simply copy paste?

The only place I see “less”, at least in Reg’s post, is in the word “tenseless”.

jakelafort wrote:
The free will and compatibilism was not very deep or convincing.

I admit to not being able to fathom the whole block universe concept, much…[Read more]

Ackshuyally, you didn’t punctuate your input to Perplexity as a question, but as a statement, which might affect the reply.

And while Perplexity may do a good job explaining the view of time-flow in a block Universe as relational, Perplexity only expressed it as a conjecture, not as a falsifiable statement and doesn’t make an effort to…[Read more]

The free will and compatibilism was not very deep or convincing.

TheEncogitationer wrote:
Highly recommended.w

Here is my question….

Hello, this is my first question here. Can you explain why the human concept of “time flow” is just an evolved survival trait as time is “only” a spacetime coordinate. Everything is…[Read more]

The DuckDuckGo privacy-friendly browser and search engine also has DuckAI, which I’ve found is very good at answering questions I’ve had about AI and provides links to at least a couple of external primary sources.

Searching with DuckDuckGo also frequently turns up DuckAI answers at the top of the page. All free to the end user,…[Read more]

I like how it easily creates PDFs for any session. The PDFs (and other…[Read more]

What could possibly go wrong with trusting Pete with it, right?

[Moderator note: I changed the name of this topic from “ChatGPT 2022/2023” to “ChatGPT 2022 to ?”]

<iframe width=”484″ height=”861″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/0hHscSOrv7Q” title=”You have shown a flaw2.” frameborder=”0″ allow=”accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share”…[Read more]

Here’s an inside baseball video for youtube creators on youtube’s evolving policy on restricting some types of AI generated content… especially the…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:

_Robert_ wrote:
I disagree. One can go from happiness to being distraught in a millisecond, without the state of things changing at all.

A state of being is not a “state of things.” It’s about how one IS. At one moment being happy and a millisecond later of being distraught. A state of being describes ones state at a parti…

[Read more]

_Robert_ wrote:
I disagree. One can go from happiness to being distraught in a millisecond, without the state of things changing at all.

A state of being is not a “state of things.” It’s about how one IS. At one moment being happy and a millisecond later of being distraught. A state of being describes ones state at a particular time, which can…[Read more]

Simon Paynton wrote:

_Robert_ wrote:
I disagree. One can go from happiness to being distraught in a millisecond, without the state of things changing at all.

Maybe you can call it a mood.

Sure, the main point being that a deterministic, rational, but emotionless human existence is probably subpar.

_Robert_ wrote:
I disagree. One can go from happiness to being distraught in a millisecond, without the state of things changing at all.

Maybe you can call it a mood.

Simon Paynton wrote:

_Robert_ wrote:
Yeah, and this is also why some say we need a god…watching, looking, keeping score.

We’re all monitored and evaluated the entire time, by ourselves and everybody who knows us. There’s a big eye watching us all the time, and it’s called the human race.

Yes, but the level of detail varies widely, and the wat…[Read more]

Unseen wrote:

_Robert_ wrote:
Happiness is an emotion, after all.

Happiness is not an emotion. Properly categorized, it’s a state of being.

I disagree. One can go from happiness to being distraught in a millisecond, without the state of things changing at all.

_Robert_ wrote:
Yeah, and this is also why some say we need a god…watching, looking, keeping score.

We’re all monitored and evaluated the entire time, by ourselves and everybody who knows us.  There’s a big eye watching us all the time, and it’s called the human race.

_Robert_ wrote:
Happiness is an emotion, after all.

Happiness is not an emotion. Properly categorized, it’s a state of being.

Unseen wrote:

_Robert_ wrote:
I agree emotions do play a role in morality because we are not Vulcans.

A belief in determinism helps one to leave emotion out of decisions because a determinist isn’t thinking in terms of praise and blame. His behavior will be more in terms of fixing things.

Not sure even the hardest determinist can manage to be e…[Read more]

Simon Paynton wrote:

_Robert_ wrote:
however for those who only make good choices for recognition or some other form of payback you might say the ends justify the means. It is still weak morality, IMHO.

Some people say that something good done for its own sake is the only kind of real virtue.

Yeah, and this is also why some say we need a…[Read more]

_Robert_ wrote:
I agree emotions do play a role in morality because we are not Vulcans.

A belief in determinism helps one to leave emotion out of decisions because a determinist isn’t thinking in terms of praise and blame. His behavior will be more in terms of fixing things.

_Robert_ wrote:
however for those who only make good choices for recognition or some other form of payback you might say the ends justify the means. It is still weak morality, IMHO.

Some people say that something good done for its own sake is the only kind of real virtue.

Simon Paynton wrote:
I think the task is to come up with alternatives to utilitarianism, consequentialism etc., which are an intuitive way in but don’t actually really go anywhere in the real world. A good alternative is morality as collaboration – both what happens within the collaboration, and its goal, are subjects for morality.

What is nee…[Read more]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
…We need emotions and consequences to govern us morally. Rationality can guide us up some weird paths……

I would suggest the converse of that is true.

All three together is ideal.

I would suggest the converse of that is true.

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
The Categorical Imperative could be considered a foundational principle of morality. It is grounded in the belief that moral actions must be guided by rationality and universalizable principles, rather than emotions or consequences. I don’t really see what it wrong with that.

That sounds good, but there’s a lot w…[Read more]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
Group Selection: Groups with cooperative, moral members tend to survive and thrive better, promoting the evolution of moral behavior.

Ethical Frameworks: Philosophical doctrines like Kant’s categorical imperative or utilitarianism guide moral actions through reasoned principles.

These are flat-out wrong.  Beyond th…[Read more]

“But what does it mean? When human artists create art, it’s meaningful.” My reply is Jackson Pollock? Mondrian? Sometimes visual art is…[Read more]

The basics of human morality are easy to understand and I think the presentation here is accurate. Yes, we can argue about individual cases and how different groups treat various scenarios but morality is…[Read more]

Reg the Fronkey Farmer wrote:
Below are some key motivators:

OK.  It has the stock answers down pat (kind of), but there’s nothing new or creative there.  It reads like a machine.

“What a fascinating way to think about black holes!” and “and I love that kind of creative rethinking”

The motivation for people’s sense of responsibility to comply with moral norms and behave morally arises from a complex interplay of psychological, social, and cultural factors. Below are some key motivators:

1. Empathy and Compassion

Innate Response: Humans are biologically wired for empathy, allowing them to feel the emotions of o…[Read more]