Rob the Blue Mage
@thebluemage.bsky.social
Honestly, I might have needed up until the bottle of wine to be sure.
December 8, 2025 at 3:36 AM
Honestly, I might have needed up until the bottle of wine to be sure.
I was doing other things for an hour. Now I'm back.
bugs bunny says nooo while looking at something
ALT: bugs bunny says nooo while looking at something
media.tenor.com
December 8, 2025 at 3:28 AM
I was doing other things for an hour. Now I'm back.
The terms you swapped indicate that you should not be attempting to pass yourself as an expert in the subject area because no expert would swap those terms. It's not that it's being used to beat you over the head, it's being used to point out that you don't know what you're talking about.
December 8, 2025 at 3:25 AM
The terms you swapped indicate that you should not be attempting to pass yourself as an expert in the subject area because no expert would swap those terms. It's not that it's being used to beat you over the head, it's being used to point out that you don't know what you're talking about.
Trust me, we've been tempted. If we could limit the damage to certain areas, we'd be arming the attack beavers already.
December 8, 2025 at 1:54 AM
Trust me, we've been tempted. If we could limit the damage to certain areas, we'd be arming the attack beavers already.
Also: guess where Peter Watts is from. 😜
December 8, 2025 at 1:52 AM
Also: guess where Peter Watts is from. 😜
Well, I'm a little hurt by the characterization of my transmissions as "unintelligible"...
December 8, 2025 at 1:50 AM
Well, I'm a little hurt by the characterization of my transmissions as "unintelligible"...
Thoroughly orthogonal to both your deflection and your statement here.
Didn't you say you had other things to do?
You are way too present in my mentions.
You are way too present in my mentions.
December 8, 2025 at 1:49 AM
Thoroughly orthogonal to both your deflection and your statement here.
So now that your claimed motivation for Kathryn's behaviour has collapsed, why don't you try this one again.
She used the same rhetorical strategy because she is ideologically motivated by this subject to rally against the people on her contra, rather than engaging in the subject matter itself -- causing her to learn nothing about something she doesn't know a lot about.
December 8, 2025 at 1:44 AM
So now that your claimed motivation for Kathryn's behaviour has collapsed, why don't you try this one again.
I'm guessing @joepoulin.bsky.social can ask you the same question.
December 8, 2025 at 1:44 AM
I'm guessing @joepoulin.bsky.social can ask you the same question.
Kathryn is not anti-AI. She's quite willing to use it.
December 8, 2025 at 1:43 AM
Kathryn is not anti-AI. She's quite willing to use it.
Why would people pick up from context that those two words were supposed to refer to the same thing, especially when one of them is not reasonably understood to refer to that thing?
December 8, 2025 at 1:42 AM
Why would people pick up from context that those two words were supposed to refer to the same thing, especially when one of them is not reasonably understood to refer to that thing?
Why would you use the term computer to mean AI when you had literally used the term AI earlier in the exact same sentence?
December 8, 2025 at 1:42 AM
Why would you use the term computer to mean AI when you had literally used the term AI earlier in the exact same sentence?
What ideology is she motivated by?
December 8, 2025 at 1:41 AM
What ideology is she motivated by?
I will add both "computers" and "chagrin" to the list of words that you don't understand the meanings of.
December 8, 2025 at 1:39 AM
I will add both "computers" and "chagrin" to the list of words that you don't understand the meanings of.
I never finished Blindsight (Peter Watts, right?), but I'm just thinking of the "this entire forest/crystalline structure/other inanimate thing is actually alive and can reason and we've been hurting it!" general storyline.
December 8, 2025 at 1:38 AM
I never finished Blindsight (Peter Watts, right?), but I'm just thinking of the "this entire forest/crystalline structure/other inanimate thing is actually alive and can reason and we've been hurting it!" general storyline.
And anyone who would use those terms interchangeably *still* shouldn't be talking about either computers or LLMs. Those terms cannot and should not be used interchangeably, context clues be damned.
December 8, 2025 at 1:36 AM
And anyone who would use those terms interchangeably *still* shouldn't be talking about either computers or LLMs. Those terms cannot and should not be used interchangeably, context clues be damned.
Buddy, your use of the term "computer" instead of "LLM" seemed pretty relevant because you hadn't used the terms interchangeably that I've seen. In fact, I don't think I've seen you use the term computer at all.
December 8, 2025 at 1:36 AM
Buddy, your use of the term "computer" instead of "LLM" seemed pretty relevant because you hadn't used the terms interchangeably that I've seen. In fact, I don't think I've seen you use the term computer at all.
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
You should stop using the term "computer" until you know what it means.
You should stop using the term "computer" until you know what it means.
December 8, 2025 at 1:33 AM
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
You should stop using the term "computer" until you know what it means.
You should stop using the term "computer" until you know what it means.
Dude.
I can't find the slide, but when I teach AI, something I often say to folks is to remember it is *still* a computer -- I think computers can reason now, don't forget that part.
And so it is going to take in a lot of what you say literally. I don't see that as a flaw or prevention of reasoning.
And so it is going to take in a lot of what you say literally. I don't see that as a flaw or prevention of reasoning.
December 8, 2025 at 1:30 AM
Dude.
The last sentence was literally all you needed to understand that your reading was wrong.
December 8, 2025 at 1:30 AM
The last sentence was literally all you needed to understand that your reading was wrong.
His definition appears to be purely mechanical. He believes computers can reason even without the presence of LLMs.
(Also wondering if we can use Hopper et al. to generate power as dynamos from all the spinning in their graves)
(Also wondering if we can use Hopper et al. to generate power as dynamos from all the spinning in their graves)
December 8, 2025 at 1:29 AM
His definition appears to be purely mechanical. He believes computers can reason even without the presence of LLMs.
(Also wondering if we can use Hopper et al. to generate power as dynamos from all the spinning in their graves)
(Also wondering if we can use Hopper et al. to generate power as dynamos from all the spinning in their graves)
I can't see any reading of that screenshot that would allow your conclusion in good faith.
December 8, 2025 at 1:28 AM
I can't see any reading of that screenshot that would allow your conclusion in good faith.
Isn't this the basis for at least one episode of Star Trek per season (and per series)?
December 8, 2025 at 1:27 AM
Isn't this the basis for at least one episode of Star Trek per season (and per series)?
And you knew what @pecunium.bsky.social meant. You're demanding treatment that you're unwilling to give to others.
December 8, 2025 at 1:25 AM
And you knew what @pecunium.bsky.social meant. You're demanding treatment that you're unwilling to give to others.