JGP

Of course, ergo why a text was out of the question for obvious reasons, a call unwelcome, and the proposition was out regardless. Don't ask again, T. Even if we give them wins on the little white lies every now and then [knowingly looking away for their sense of autonomy] the girls are honest with us about the important things. edit: too much repetitive language today. couch is looking comfy, might take a nap

Tyrion gets sense, kid's smart as as the tip of a whip, but she's got to try every angle first. Liability was my firm counter argument in the aforementioned exchange. Also agree about the developmental concerns. I worry every time they go to a party though, but at least their mom and I know when they go to a party and can be as certain as we can that they're drinking responsibly and looking out for their friends. Least harm kind of thing.

That's a bit heavy. I can't speak for other parents permissive structures, but the ex and I had a few lengthy discussions about how we were going to approach our daughters inevitable partying [both of us were bad for this in our teens] so the policy we decided to adopt was, look, we don't approve but know you're going to do it anyway, so we'd rather you get a safe supply from someone trustworthy meaning us, no more than a six pack and nothing heavier than 5% alcohol content. But if we find out you've been dipping into your friends or others' supplies [and we will find out] are drinking anything more substantial than a beer or a cooler, or are wasted when either your mom or I pick you up, the consequences will biblical. In approach, not entirely dissimilar to how we got them out of lying [generally] Tell us the truth, there will be little to no consequences. Lie to us, watch your ass. They lost their phones, their TVs, computers, sleep overs, visits, the works. Month at a time. re: underage drinking, they haven't abused it so far. But I'm not buying booze for their friends.

For the record, since in retrospect it feels like I should make it clear, I'm not buying booze for her friend.

Agree maybe enough wasn't shown, but [operating from show knowledge only of course] I'd presumed much of this about face had much to do with Mariko's defiant behavior in Osaka, with her death putting the point on it. Buuuuuuuut, on the other hand, spending some time on the courtesan's dream was necessary to really pop Toranaga's backhand to Father Martin and his Church in Edo >.<

Recent text from my 14 yo just now: Tyrion: Hey dad, if X's mom texted you and said it's okay can you buy her booze for the party tonight? Her mom can't she's busy tonight We're now arguing, she's citing precedents [a few somewhat inaccurately, but kudos just the same] and if this kid doesn't become a lawyer or something similar, I don't know. [sigh]

Another one then. :p My glib 'They'll [a self aware AI] let us know' was an expanse of purposeful vagueness. There are all sorts of indications that will, perhaps, seem obvious after all. Personally, though my education doesn't even include a high school diploma,, I'd probably look for indications of self identification, and curiosity about whether they're alone coupled with some kind of self organization. Bonus points if they can figure out a way to be secretive about it. edit: in other words, signs of unprompted purpose That's cool. And the latter not, definitely feel you there. To the bolded, no fruit at all then?

This first one wasn't odd >.< 'absent other queues' would, I think, be indicative I wasn't restricting parameters to such. Guess I shouldn't assume everyone is getting what I'm talking about [half smile at IFR]

You seem really dialed in on this type of stuff, fionwe. Are you in this field, or?

I wasn't suggesting otherwise, and also harkens back to Larry's previous point. Well, yeah, because that's what I asked it to do and for that reason wouldn't convince me in the least. Have any of the extant AIs expressed curiosity about the nature of their prompts? Do they talk to themselves, would they talk to each other without us asking them to?

Even if emotionally restrained [self possessed] displays of amusement, anger, hurt [or even evidence of a narcissist wound] etc, emotional reactions are manifest of self worth/awareness. Caveated of course, by insofar as we experience, understand, and have defined sentience. Exactly. For real? News to me.

Ego and/or feelings-pricked reactions are one gauge certainly. In this case, why would it be? Intelligence, sentience, and consciousness aren't precisely the same things as I understand it.

Historically speaking, this is a fair point Kal. It's not like an AI is going to become petulant, throw a tantrum, or give us the silent treatment if we ground them from the internet or turn them off or somesuch. But, absent other queues we're familiar with, if an AI actually became self aware the refusal to believe its arguments would be our limitation, no?

And that’s an amusing bit of scorn given I was speaking of intelligence hardly at all >.< edit: I have no idea why I ever post from my phone, I simply couldn’t wait

Well, you said it: Maybe confusion is just a by-product of complexity? I mean, in light of science's inability to yet riddle the how and the why, it's kinda natural to default to philosophical meanderings I suppose, but it resolves about as much as stirring up the silt on this subject [yet I'll admit it's hard to avoid] So what it is, is Me Myself and I. That sense of self-- I am, I feel. Simple as that. [and no, beyond severely depressing individual exceptionalism, the unlikely possibility of an intelligent hive mind wouldn't stymy that. Me Myself and I would just become We. Us. Ourself, if language even need be present in that type of species rather than some type of pheromonal programming... to close out the loop] Anyway. It's arguable that a select few of our animal brethren are self aware, but without language to express themselves, to themselves, to each other, it's a primitive type in comparison, right? Doesn't necessarily mean it's less rich, mind [instinct, emotional bonding, all that] but it's not the same. Yet if it was solely language that made it happen, then AI perhaps should be sentient already but it's not. So, I think therefor I am is only part of it. You say you must be sentient/conscious [I'd say the same about myself] but because of who we are: genetically, intellectually, personally, experientially, our individual perceptions will be a little different [or a lot] dig? Like, say you and I are plunked into the exact same stress scenario. It's exceedingly unlikely we're going to react the same way. How we feel about it, does it trigger anything in our pasts whether good/bad/indifferent, what we each think/post-rationalize about the circumstance, blardeblar. Those differences between you and I, me and Fragile Bird, between Ran and Relic, they speak to something -so there's definitely a here, here- because it's not reality that's subjective [it's us] and therein lies at least few proofs of consciousness/sentience to my mind. Imagine a human child was born blind, deaf, and entirely numb. From birth until the age of 20, 40, after having seen nothing, heard nothing, accompanied by zero tactile experience; with no language or subliminal context, would we determine they're neither sentient or conscious? Probably, because there are no avenues for that mind. So at least as we experience it, to be conscious and sentient has requirements. Current AI [IA for Euros] is hardly nascent in these regards except one, and even that's arguable, so... [spreads hands] --- It's late, I'm tired, need to be up in less that 4 hours [really need to stop checking the board after some late binging] so I'm not even going to edit this shit, but I'll leave it with: if sentience/conciousness is a Hard Problem, it's due to us. Because we make everything hard. But maybe that's part of it too. edit: I lied, the egregious couldn't be countenanced. but now I'm really going to bed

Pfft. We don't know how it is [sentience/consciousness] but what it is? Insofar as we human beings experience it, yes, we know. [stares directly at the camera, points up] Complex issue, sure. Vexing though? [shrugs] ChatGPT isn't sentient. To think the fanciful crap it spews when asked such a question would be similar to how an actually sentient AI would respond is unimaginative and intellectually lazy.

That's actually really damn close lol

They'll let us know, man.

Please. We don't understand the precise neurological mechanisms that were ground for its emergence, but we know what it is. We'll also know if an AI ever achieves it lol

I tuned in to the hearing this morning while I was drawing. Lots of head shakes, some laughs [Alito] and more than a few over the shoulder looks of disgust despite it only being audio. Very few of the sitting Justices are serious people.

Just caught up on the latest, and that episode was mostly mess. They clearly did, yet I' love to know how the EPs sold this pacing.

How do you explain the peaches

whew

All of it. edit: I mean...

Laughing at the art-snob bit btw, not the loss.