Recent content by DoIMustHaveAnUsername?

I am not sure what your argument exactly even is. Hume's point was that there is no apparent necessary connection between cause and effect. As an example, just looking at the cause a priori you can't figure out what the effect is, no matter how intelligent you are (without prior knowledge of...

I believe Newton, Leibniz, and Descartes were christians or at least theists. Hobbes is mixed. Either way I don't see why this is relevant. Also we are going into tangents here. As I said my issues here are deeper than Newtonian vs Not. So pre-Newtonian vs post-Newtonian is an orthogonal side...

I don't have a problem with the view that "things have a nature that causes the effect" - that's basically the idea of dispositions - dispositional powers. It's not a unworkable thesis. I find this more plausible that laws are idealizations of dispositional activities of things (agents) than...

I don't think it's quite correct that Hume's contemporaries didn't like him. IIRC, he did achieve fame for his philosopher in his later life - although initially his treatise was relatively ignored - again that doesn't tell that he was disliked. Also "methodological naturalism" were already...

First, there isn't any clear differentiation between natural and metaphysical. Metaphysical - insofar we are talking about ontology - is just about what exists - on the nature of being. Nature is the expression of being so not something ametaphysical. Perhaps, you tried to mean "supernatural"...

I always found the idea of things somehow having "explanations" strange. Also yes, I don't buy PSR. I also don't think "natural causes" provide reasons in a strong sense in the first place (consider Hume for example, there doesn't seem to be any logically necessary connection between causes and...

I would think humans too depend on prompts. For example evolution set up some initial priming, then there is constant experiential input from within mother's womb. AutoGPT is designed to be more agentic and autonomous. One just needs to provide high level goals, and it then keeps on doing its...

"I don't know. Either there is no real explanation at all - brute fact (most plausible to me) - after all why should there even be reasons at all? or perhaps one can derive everything from logical laws (unlikely, but that's probably the only way you can fully avoid brute fact. Unless everything...

I don't see what Hopfield networks has to do with self-loops specifically; but this paper draws connection between Transformers and hopfields: https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.02217 I don't see what exactly you are trying to do by combining Transformers + RNN. While not your exact architecture, but...

I think self-awareness is a pretty vague idea; and it's not clear what people are expecting in terms of AI being self-aware. It can simulate the patterns of "self-speak" associated with its prompt priming it to be an AI-assistant. Parroting patterns of words isn't necessarily self-awareness even...

First, I apoligize if my post offended you in any way. Second, there exists ChatGPT4. Third, I am talking about GPT as a family of models. Some of the papers I linked are older - only uses GPT3/GPT3.5 (example: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2210.02441.pdf). Moreover, I have personally tested ChatGPT in...

Basic ChatGPT don't have access to internet. Some like BingAI may, but all of them are prone to bullshiting. They are trained to generate convincing texts and plausible follow up. Whether they will be factual will be based on statistics of the data - but there is no clear cut gaurantee. It can...

I would be careful with it. It has a tendency to hallucinate. While that's true for human bots as well, you can have a better estimate how to trust based on historical experience with the particular human, and/or based on sources/fact-checking/peer-reviews etc. While GPT is a being of chaos...

It can correct its own mistakes. You can ask it to recheck for error and fix them if any. You can do that in a loop for double-triple checks. I don't see what pre-training has to do with it being human-level or not. It can. https://github.com/Torantulino/Auto-GPT...

I'm not claiming to know anything. All I am pointing out are the deficiences of most of the explanations that try to avoid bruteness.