

someone else:
theoretically, it is!
–sincerely, someone else.


someone else:
theoretically, it is!
–sincerely, someone else.


reproduce everything real, living neurons do.
is not a strict requirement for intelligence.
it’s also an extreme misrepresentation to say it approximates actual neurons.
well you’re in luck, because i have seen a website counter to your claim!
Thread: Circuits


“intelligence” is not a very narrow term! imagenet classifiers are definitely intelligent in some way.


instead of llm, slm! (small language model)


tried baking making your own ai, like, as a joke? you’ll know how bad “getting training data” is


neural networks (“ai”) are really cool, and if i get around to messing around with one it probably would be fun. the problem is not the neural network itself, but every. single. thing. other than it


in scheme, everything* is first class!
*i haven’t checked


you could make a program that verifies that the code matches the proof and that the proof is sound, but then you have to verify the program, and verify the verification, and verify your system of logic is consistent, which by gödel’s incompleteness theorem is impossible(?)


removed familiars
:(


“ransomware can’t be decrypted” implies the ransomware itself can’t be decrypted, ugh


https://stallmansupport.org/
we should all know this by now
c, can i have a object oriented programming
c: no, we have object oriented programming at home.
object oriented programming at home: struct
(??)