Cheers

I should probably learn how you link all this stuff up, probably not doing myself a lot of favours ignoring it.

Is the AI vision local?

This could come in pretty handy for me. What’s he edit on that does this?

And not even the final one

Oh yeh that looked cool I was pretty pumped about that. Is it not so good after all?

He was, undoubtedly. But in my memory and my conception of the two characters, their interactions were always like this . With Miss Piggy the angry diva or upset girlfriend to Kermit having a chuckle. It might actually have been that that happened maybe a couple of times ever but as a little kid you don’t have the best grasp of nuance so that’s the impression it formed. I also had obviously a lot less appreciation for characters having roles and functions so even though that exchange was actually really funny and very memorable since I still remember it even today, as a child I only take it on a very literal level, so Miss Piggy isn’t a diva character that creates funny situations by being quick to anger and not tolerating anything she considers beneath her, instead she’s “mean” or “fussy” you know? Obviously different as a grown up, but it made me not like the character as a kiddo.

As a kid I always hated Miss Piggie since she as sort of the humourless foil to Kermit but I think I can appreciate porcine Yoda a bit more now if only for the voice.

Yeh he always seemed rock and roll!

It was a hell of a surprise when I cut open a peach and the pit was smaller and softer than usual and it split in two in my hands and a little slightly drowsy looking winged ant crawled out of one of the halves and started walking around on the counter. Little guy must have had such a long journey. I don’t know how the hell they got INSIDE the pit.

It’s more likely a collection of more mundane unconscious observations using all of your more normal senses that get very quickly consolidated in to one intuitive sense of dubious reliability but which in the absence of better information keeps you a bit safer.

If the username doesn’t have to be unique, couldn’t you impersonate people?

I don’t feel like LLMs are conscious and I act accordingly as though they aren’t, but I do wonder about the confidence with which you can totally dismiss the notion. Assuming that they are seems like a leap, but since we don’t really know exactly what consciousness is, it seems difficult to rigorously decide upon what does and doesn’t get to be in the category. The usual means by which LLMs are explained not to be conscious, and indeed what I usually say myself, is something like your “they just output probability based on current context” or some variation of “they’re just guessing the next word”, but… is that definitely nothing like what we ourselves do and then call consciousness? Or if indeed that is definitively quite unlike anything we do, does that dissimilarity alone suffice to declare LLMs not conscious? Is ours the only possible example of consciousness, or is the process that drives the behaviour with LLMs possibly just another form or another way of arriving at consciousness? There’s evidently something that triggers an instinctual categorising, most wouldn’t classify a rock as conscious and would find my suggestion that ‘maybe it’s just consciousness in another form than ours’ a pretty weak way to assert that it is, but then again there’s quite a long way between a literal rock and these models running on specific rocks arranged in a particular way and which produce text in a way that’s really similar to the human beings that we all collectively tend to agree are conscious. Is being able to summarise the mechanisms that underpin the behaviour who’s output or manifestation looks like consciousness, enough on it’s own to explain why it definitely isn’t consciousness? Because, what if our endeavours to understand consciousness and understand a biological basis for it in ourselves bear fruit and we can explain deterministically how brains and human consciousness work? In that case, we could, if not totally predict human behaviours deterministically, then at least still give a pretty good and similar summarisation of how we produce those behaviours that look like consciousness. Would we at that point declare that human beings are not conscious either, or would we need a new basis upon which to exclude these current machine approximations of it?

I always felt that things such as the Chinese Room thought experiment didn’t adequately deal with what I was driving at in the previous paragraph and it seems to me that dismissals of machine consciousness on the grounds that LLMs are just statistical models that don’t know what they are doing are missing a similar point. Are we sure that we ourselves are not mechanistically following complicated rules just as neural networks and LLMs are and that’s simply what the experience of consciousness actually is - an unconscious execution of rulesets? Before the current crop of technology that has renewed interest in these questions, when it all seemed a lot more theoretical and perennially decades off, I was comfortable with this uncomfortable thought. Now that we actually have these impressive models that have people wondering about the topic, I seem to be skewing more skeptical and less generous about ascribing consciousness. Suddenly now the Chinese Room thought experiment as a counter to whether these conscious-looking LLMs are really conscious looks more convincing, but that’s not because of any new or better understanding on my part. I seem to be just goal post shifting when faced with something that does a better job of looking conscious than any technology I’d seen previously.

An Xbox remote?

MSN Messenger for the win!

Do you think they can be trusted not to take some sort of action that might take the whole situation and process out of OP’s control have a lot of unintended consequences? I feel like one’s plea that they not act upon it has a lot of risk of being overruled, or ‘act’ having some multitude of interpretations. Your suggestion makes some sense in terms of trying to get ahead of thing in case they spiral out of control for some other reason but it could result in these 3rd parties making things so much worse for everyone even if he has no ill will from the outset.

It’s also clever that they called that shift “blue watch” lol

Thanks mate haha glad my veteran underage drinking shenanigans were good for something other than misspent youth. Hope OP saw it before they decided that another drink will probably be fine. 🥳🥴🤢🤮😪

It’s really easy to feel like so far, everything has been feeling great and you’re not even really that drunk yet so why not have another drink? It’s also easy, each time you have a drink to be less good at deciding if having another one is a good idea until you’re quite suddenly really quite drunk and now you can’t do anything about it and also the effect continues so my best advice is, if it’s feeling ‘pretty great, I could take more’, that’s the perfect time to stop because you’ve probably got away with the buzz you wanted but not all the consequences of getting way drunker than you meant to.

I think the problem op had with this situation and boss’ approach was that it definitely had shades of admonishment, or at least potentially so, hence wanting to know op’s the thought process. I don’t manage people professionally and never have so I’m not speaking from knowledge of best practice, but I do know that in general this isn’t going to be conducive to good outcomes. Necessary or otherwise, if admonishment or at least finding of fault with the behaviour of the person is on the cards doing so publicly is embarrassing and unlikely to foster the goodwill required for that person to think or behave differently since it moves the whole situation out of the framing of learning a lesson about how to do your job in future and in to something adversarial, with the boss now a malign influence to be resented or feared or both and the humiliation in front of peers now also means that person is more likely to feel isolated from them too with their peers are now to be viewed with apprehension as well as the boss. It’s hard to work well and to avoid making mistakes with such factors at play. One such occasion alone, probably not, but if it’s something boss wants to do a lot as a general management strategy, it’s hard to see that going well for anyone involved.