Marshferm

The interesting thing is w gen Ai images, a reliance in terms of photographic evidence may come down to analog. Plus Kodak returning to film stock, the future looks bright for 35mm

Stick to my Nikon scanner until this comes down in $

These are not examples, they’re narrative (false) equivalencies.

Brains don’t perform Natural language CSR etc, those are cultural extensions separate from mental states etc. there are no functional equivalencies here.

There are many many empirical disputes for function eg

Aru et al “The feasibility of artificial consciousness through the lens of neuroscience” December 2023

There’s no functional similarity in the slightest. Notice you can’t cite examples.

There's nothing similar about LLMs and human brains. Theyre entirely divergent. Training a machine has nothing remotely to do with biological development.

To decipher if there is anything like spatial intelligence, which is an oxymoronic term at most and redundant at least, one has to decipher the base units of the processes prior to their materialization in the allocortex. And to assign a careful concatenated/parametric categorization of what is unitized, where the processes focus into thresholds etc. This frontier propaganda and the few arvix/nature papers here are too synthetic to lead anywhere of merit.

Of course, but the mechanisms “remain obscure”. The entorhinal cortex is but a facet of this puzzle and placement vs head direction etc must be understood beyond mere prediction. There are too many essential parts that are not understood particularly senses and emotion which play the tinkering precursors to evolutionary function that are excluded now as well as the likelyhood that prediction error and prediction are but mistaken precursor computational bottlenecks to unpredictability. Pushing AI into the 4% of a process materially identified as entorhinal is way premature.

This approach simply follows suit with the blundering reverse engineering of the brain in cog sci where material properties are seen in isolation and processes are deduced piecemeal. The brain can only be understood as a whole first. See rhythms of the brain or unlocking the brain.

There’s a terrifying lack of curiosity in the paper you posted, a kind of smug synthetic rush to import code into a part of the brain that’s a directory among directories that has redundancies as a warning: we get along without this.

Your and their view (OSM) is too narrow. eg categorization is baked into the whole brain. How? This is one of 1000s of processes that generalize materially across the entire brain. Isolating "learning" to the allocortex is incredibly misleading.

https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(25)...

It's not enough by a long shot. Placement isn't related directly to vicarious trial and error, path integrations, sequence generation.

There's a whole giant gap between grid cells and intelligence.

It’s format based. The basis for explanations are folk science: stories. They aren’t any more accurate than when they began except they incorporate science. But that does not in itself make them scientific. Same with economics, which is not a science but it includes aspects of it. Now look at code, which is neither tethered to engineering or science, but exists wholly separate operating behavior, operating folk science and science yet in conflation winds up being folk science.

The news is folk science. Explanations (a dispute over money ends in murder) are substituted for correlations (not every dispute over money ends up violent). The news reinforces big techs reliance on exploitative explanation addiction rather than the widespread adoption of post folk science correlations.

Drop another rung for the patriarchy- is chat just a very temporary stop gap en route to partnership parity or even matriarchal dominance?

Let’s just say intelligence is changing and wisdom is in deep collapse using this tech.

Our drive to be creative and chance failure and seek expert help dissolves in a general tool that automates what it is to be human.

I disagree. And in a protocol form of comm, strongly disagree with any forms of policing discourse when the parties don’t appear to be aggrieved enough to merit it.

Interesting how little protocol is understood whereas site guidelines are enforced arbitrarily.

The collapse of information is developed from the basis of explanation.

Each level requiring policing simply demonstrates the flaw was invented at the earlier stages.

I would read what they wrote first, cursory nihilistic dismissal, demonstrative cursing. I don’t think that level of discourse belongs here, what they wrote.

In my view you’re flagging the wrong response.

Posters that extol the virtues of misinformation do not belong in discourse. Simple.

Movies are dead technology. They have no eminence in culture. No essays are going to resurrect them, not even metaphorically.

I would upvote the thread to increase crowdsourcing for this.

Modes of thought are destiny, that’s how the east is leading and will win.

As images and words have no original connection to thought, this slop vortex has less connection.

It’s far more uninspired like Jacques Tati or Billy Wilder. Chatbots that coach the weakest and most damaged psyches into suicides. That make up things. That demonstrate how truly poor our tech prowess is. Think dystopian screwball comedy where tech is running down beloved bodega cats and citizens are burning teslas to the ground.

You’re out of date/touch. We’re already looking at decentralized meaning, where meaning is both visualized and actualized and operable. Journalism and religion are part of ye olde ancient regime of cause and effect. Religion is just conspiracy theory. We need a new post truth form.

Get his name right, then repost.

No they're fragmenting, study the numbers. They're no longer coherent as state-myth, they're now individual claims to moral and ethical superiority.

And notice the idea that sloganeering propaganda is used to describe this: "coming back stronger than ever".

As if religion, myth etc is a brand of detergent, or a sports franchise, or a fast food enterprise.

https://www.npr.org/2024/01/24/1226371734/religious-nones-ar...

The narrative constructs of cause and effect, things like political parties, religion, myth, anything that's folk science, is dead. These are dinosaurs in an analytic-non-linear reality where chaos and game theory operate. Toss all those old constructs out.

Lippmann stated bluntly in 1926, narratives are bunk, the news can't resolve any idea of analytic complexity, yet we kept them around like dinosaurs.

Face it, journalism is finished, it's extinct.

No narrative is accurate, it's subjective cause and effect. We've known this since Aristotle, and neuropsychologists (Merlin Donald), neuroscientists (OKeefe, Kandel, Mosers), and evolutionary thinkers (Rosenberg) deal storytelling fatal blows.

No one trusts narratives in general now. They're illusions entirely. Retire them as communication.

Because no one trusts information about events relayed in storytelling. It all looks and sounds fake.

No. Consciousness is wordless.

Of course I watched it, it’s completely false as scientific evidence. It’s anecdotes.

This conspiracy junk is still out here is insane, a society in mental decline led by prefrontal addicts.

Anecdotal antivax propaganda.

“during the study period April 2019-March 2022 [before and after Covid vax rollout], 2,242 people experienced OHCA; the authors noted no variation in median monthly rates during the three time periods. Within 30 days of their COVID-19 vaccination (type not documented), 38 people died and were referred for forensic assessment: “No differences were seen in underlying causes of death compared with previously published age-matched data” (Paratz et al., 2023).

Reading isn’t analog, it’s a symbolic code atop metaphors posing as conduits. Both layers are arbitrary ie they’re heavily reduced code/models from analog. Coders need a remedial pass into info and quant analysis.

The idea anyone would label text as analog says quite a bit at how low categorization and analytic thinking has drifted in the comp ‘sci’ age.

When a creative task is automated into repetition, it forms bureaucracy. You are a techno bureaucrat.