All of VeritableCB's Comments + Replies
This is an old post but I can't help myself, I'm a law student and I'm going to explain why this doesn't really hold water. The Anderson test is done to determine whether a particular statute is constitutional or not; showing that a different system would better advance a voter's interests is simply not a part of the analysis. All we're trying to find out is if a particular statute sufficiently considered voting interests. If another system would pass the test, that's great, but all that tells us is that alternative voting systems would be constitutional i...
I think whether or not people change their values is a matter that can be resolved sufficiently by polling them at various ages to see what they think about stuff.
I think you're getting wrapped up in some extraneous details. Natural selection happens because when stuff keeps making itself, there tends to be more it, and evolution occurs as a result. We're going to keep evolving and there's gonna keep being natural selection no matter what. We don't have to worry about it. We can never be misaligned with it, it's just what's happening.
1
I don't think this line of argumentation is actually challenging the concept of stochastic parroting on a fundamental level. The ability of generative ML to create images or solve math problems or engage in speculation about stories, etc, were all known to the researchers who coined the term; these things you point to, far from challenging the concept of stochastic parrots, are assumed to be true by these researchers.
When you point to these models not understanding how reciprocal relationships between objects work, but apologize for it by refer... (read more)