@official_techsupport's banner p

official_techsupport

who/whom

2 followers   follows 2 users  
joined 2022 September 04 19:44:20 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 122

official_techsupport

who/whom

2 followers   follows 2 users   joined 2022 September 04 19:44:20 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 122

Verified Email

Grok 3.0 apparently can listen to music and integrate the results with the rest of its knowledge.

Twitter released their newest iteration on AI, it's fun, clever, and noticeably less lobotomized than basically everything before it. It's currently free with a basic twitter account. But I accidentally discovered a thing that kinda blew my mind. I got into a silly argument with it, as one does, about whether you can legitimately pronounce "gambler" with three syllables. As one of my arguments I brought up a Johnny Cash song where he, to my ear, does it. The robot responded:

In Johnny Cash’s version, recorded in 2003 and released posthumously, he pronounces both "gambler" and "rambler" with two syllables. Listening to the track, particularly in the chorus lines "Tell the rambler, the gambler, the back biter," Cash delivers them as "ram-bler" and "gam-bler." His deep, steady vocal style and the song’s rhythmic structure—driven by a stomping beat—support this two-syllable phrasing. There’s no elongation into a three-syllable "gam-buh-lur" or "ram-buh-lur" as you suggested earlier with "gambler." Cash’s Southern accent is present but doesn’t stretch the words beyond their standard two-syllable form here.

For reference, you can hear it clearly around the 0:45 mark in the official recording. Here’s a link to the track on YouTube: Johnny Cash - God's Gonna Cut You Down. Check it out and let me know if you hear something different!

I disagree obviously, but notice the timestamp!!! I'm reasonably sure that nobody in the history of the internet had this exact argument before and mentioned the exact timestamp in that exact song. Moreover, before that I asked it about "House of the Raising Sun" (because I misremembered the vocalist drawling "gambling" there) and the robot also timestamped the place in the recording where it was said.

So I don't know. It's possible that this is a result of an unsophisticated hack, give the AI a database of timestamped subtitles for youtube videos (something they already have generated), then it bullshits its way through the argument about what was actually said and how. That's totally possible, it's really good at bullshitting!

The other possibility is that it actually listens to videos/audios and analyses them on the fly or during training, whatever. What's super interesting about is that, look, we started with LLMs that literally had not a single real world reference, nothing that could remotely qualify as a qualia of say seeing an apple. They were trained entirely on people talking about their perceptions of apples, and somehow they managed to learn what apples are pretty well, without ever seeing one (which all philosophers agreed should be impossible, seeing apples must come first, and yet here we were). And now, if it's not just a subtitle hack, then we have quietly passed another milestone, the robots now can hear and see and correlate that with their knowledge bases.

Also, I asked the robot directly:

Do you have timestamped subtitles for Johnny Cash - God's Gonna Cut You Down?

I don’t have direct access to pre-made timestamped subtitles for Johnny Cash’s "God’s Gonna Cut You Down" from American V: A Hundred Highways (2006), but I can create them for you based on the official recording! I’ll use the widely available version on YouTube (Johnny Cash - God's Gonna Cut You Down), which runs 2:39, and break down the lyrics with approximate timestamps. This is the stripped-down, acoustic rendition produced by Rick Rubin, and I’ll align the subtitles to Cash’s vocal delivery.

Here are the timestamped subtitles:

(timestamped subtitles followed)

Idk, it responded pretty much instantly, so it could be lying. Or maybe it has preprocessed subtitles for popular videos.

I think that what you're looking at is https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/03/04/a-thrivesurvive-theory-of-the-political-spectrum/ but the "thrive" side are not chill hippies, but the people who compete with their fellow man rather than with sabertooth tigers etc. So "survivalists" like small rigid hierarchies because they are good for surviving a zombie apocalypse, while "thrivists" like huge social hierarchies where they can backstab their way to the top with utter disregard for external reality.

From that point of view "First it's Protestantism (Conformist) vs Catholicism (Conscientious)" gets it exactly backwards.

Fortunately @everyone saw my message and I was able to join the game, but not before he got his drama account temp shadowbanned for falling afoul of the Discord filter.

Apparently it was not even a temp shadowban as such, Carp manually unbanned me as he does to most victims of Aevann's rslurration that catch his eye.

They are making correct arguments that fail only in a very small subset of problems, those with information acquisition that is affected by the decisions.

I disagree that this is a very small subset of problems, the majority of real life problems let you decide to wait and collect more information or decide how many resources you're willing to bet. See examples in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-armed_bandit

For example, I think I first noticed this problem many years ago in one of Scott's linkdumps where he disapprovingly linked to Obama saying that CIA told him that such and such thing had a 70% probability but really they had no good information so it was a coinflip. And Scott was indignant, 70% is 70% what more do you need to know before you authorize some military operation, even the President doesn't understand probability smdh. In my opinion Obama was right, if technically imprecise, while Scott was wrong, which demonstrates the danger of having a little knowledge and also the need for more awareness.

is not easy to communicate succinctly.

You say this as if it's not Bayesians' fault that they have not developed (or got into a habit of using) a succinct way of conveying how much of the estimate comes from the prior and how much from the previous updates. I would understand if it was an acknowledged hard problem in need of community's attention, but for example Yudkowsky sequences don't mention it at all.

I'm reading the webnovel A Practical Guide to Evil on @official_techsupport's recommendation.

For the record while I can recommend several webnovels, I've never read this one and also have a very low tolerance for badly written stuff.

I started developing weird pains in my right wrist, then read somewhere to pay attention to how you sleep, in particular that you don't have your palm angled at 90 degrees forward from the wrist. Then I discovered that for some reason I did this all the time, made a conscious effort to stop doing that, and had no issues since.

I think I can. I'd also ask like half of the people I play Blood on the Clocktower with regularly and they will probably agree and we will make it.

I think that if/when there's a call for it, it won't be the average ability of some particular ethnicity/faith/whatever, but self-selected (but also gatekept) people that are multiple deviations above the average in whatever traits you think are good for manning a generation ship. A random 1000 mormons have nothing on the top 1000 <insert the ethnic group you most despise> most excited about colonizing Alpha Centauri.

I don't think this has been proposed yet, in this exact form: you can do a trick by having a cis person trapped in a trans body, as a result of an unfortunate polyjuice potion mishap or teleportation incident or whatever "easy way to change gender" the setting allows, but with a twist that they can't easily change it back for whatever reason--some extra spell stabilizing the body or a booby trap in a sci-fi setting or like some info they can't risk being destroyed.

Make sure to firmly establish their original gender, so there's no doubt that when they keep behaving and dressing etc the same way after the incident that happens half the game in, that's their true self. Have explicit quests trying to change them back and explicit evidence of them trying to ameliorate their dysphoria at least partially.

This is going to be neatly subversive, because on the one hand it's sort of gender essentialist and everyone knows that the character really started as their original gender and there's no mystery about what happened to them, but on the other hand, all right, what do we do now that their genitalia don't match their gender? And what if some people are actually born with such a mismatch in our world? Kind of like, since I know that I'm definitely right-handed, I'm open to the possibility that definitely left-handed people exist.

An interesting question is what to make their original gender: male would be more relatable for the intended audience (but you have to play it completely straight, never once veering into the fetish territory), originally-female would be more CW-salient.

Is it really more likely that academics believe HBD but resolve to fight it anyway?

Yeah, when surveyed anonymously only about 15-20% believe that there's no genetic component in the Black-White achievement gap in the US.

http://lepo.it.da.ut.ee/~spihlap/snyderman@rothman.pdf - 1987 survey.

https://sci-hub.st/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289619301886 - 2020 survey.

This contrasts with practically nobody saying this in public and consequently the public (exemplified by you here) believing that this reflects on the actual privately held beliefs of scientists.

And, specifically, if you want to see how an example of speaking power to truth looks like in this context, https://www.chronicle.com/article/racial-pseudoscience-on-the-faculty (paywall bypass: https://archive.li/ZxVYk)

Indigestion is a common side effect of alcohol withdrawal. Alcohol helps with that.

https://xkcd.com/512/ but for arguing on the internet.

You might want to read this paper on Reverse Dominance Hierarchy: https://www.unl.edu/rhames/courses/current/readings/boehm.pdf

I got to it from https://meltingasphalt.com/tears/ which you might want to read first, as an aperitif of sorts.

If you remove the recency requirement then:

  1. Original Bioshock is misunderstood by most people IMO. What was the point of Ryan's final speech? If he knew the code phrase, why he decided not to use it?

  2. SOMA had some very visceral non-political based and reality-pilled moments which I don't want to spoil.

I hear you about the existential angst though.

I haven't read "The Three Body Problem" yet, so idk if I'm talking about a similar feeling, but Charles Stross' "Palimpsest" put me into a very strange state of mind closer to the end. It begins as a straight up rewrite of Asimov's "The End of Eternity" (which Stross freely admits) but then goes elsewhere.

what do you mean by burning off horrible habits, how does that work? if somebody died having stolen on some occasions, burning in purgatory is not going to reverse any of the thefts he did. and once he gets into heaven why would he need to steal anyway and if he steals in heaven, there is nothing in christianity about being kicked out of heaven, and if there was, purgatory would no longer be needed by your rationalization.

Imagine the world as a reinforcement learning environment that's intended to produce Good Servants of God. Emphasis on willing to serve God. Now the thing is, God doesn't care at all about punishing anyone, it only cares about burning out whatever parts of one's personality that prevented them from obeying His rules. An evil person who rejected God completely will have only a few parts of his personality lifted into the Godhood. A nice person who sinned occasionally and was upset about it will have the sinning part of himself removed, as he wanted all along, and get uploaded mostly intact.

Any amount of alcohol temporarily reduces intelligence and precision in your physical movements - a tiny bit if buzzed, a lot if drunk.

Not true, alcohol is considered a PED and is banned in shooting competitions: http://www.faqs.org/sports-science/Sc-Sp/Shooting.html

This reminded me of a note from the Talos Principle:

You know, the more I think about it, the more I believe that no-one is actually worried about AIs taking over the world or anything like that, no matter what they say. What they're really worried about is that someone might prove, once and for all, that consciousness can arise from matter. And I kind of understand why they find it so terrifying. If we can create a sentient being, where does that leave the soul? Without mystery, how can we see ourselves as anything other than machines? And if we are machines, what hope do we have that death is not the end?

What really scares people is not the artificial intelligence in the computer, but the "natural" intelligence they see in the mirror.

"Never let me go" is very fucked up, I'm not sure there's another book that touched me so deeply. Actually, when I try to recall anything similar, certain moments of "The Talos Principle" come to mind, in how it builds a very relatable world and then force kicks you into the Acceptance stage of grief about it while you're utterly unprepared.

My insight was that intuition is analytical thinking encoded.

No, absolutely not. You can train intuition (think, reflexes, like playing tennis) without any analytical thinking at all. Animals do it, no problem.

The main point of analytical thinking is to provide a check on intuition for when it goes wrong. Like, you encounter an optical illusion, a fish in the water appears farther than it is, so to spear it properly you need to aim closer, "wat in heck, my eyes deceive me" is where the improvement starts.

Pirate metal is pretty upbeat. Alestorm - Fucked With an Anchor for example!

OMG THANK YOU! It's been bothering me literally for years!

How did you find it?

Baba is You in the puzzle category, no contest.

Muphry's Law strikes again LOL.

It's Kisilev btw, you keep misspelling his surname.

I spent a lot of time observing these sorts of groups a while back and in the end they come across as, I guess, sad, since they never end up creating much of anything useful and for many of their members it seems to eventually become a damaging obsession.

So you're saying that you spent copious amounts of time cataloging instances of events you believed made such things or groups look bad. Endlessly.