Hate those bandits, and that general area with all of them; their blades are good at killing demons tho

I read that “Prickly muffin” and now I’m debating on whether I should or should not watch Bojack Horseman again

Valid point, though I’m surprised that cyc was used for non-AI purposes since, in my very very limited knowledge of the project, I thought the whole thing was based around the ability to reason and infer from an encyclopedic data set.

Regardless, I suppose the original topic of this discussion is heading towards a prescriptivist vs descriptivist debate:

Should the term Artificial Intelligence have the more literal meaning it held when it first was discussed, like by Turing or in the sci-fi of Isaac Asimov?

OR

Should society’s use of the term in reference to advances in problem solving tech in general or specifically its most prevalent use in reference to any neural network or learning algorithm in general be the definition of Artificial Intelligence?

Should we shift our definition of a term based on how it is used to match popular use regardless of its original intended meaning or should we try to keep the meaning of the phrase specific/direct/literal and fight the natural shift in language?

Personally, I prefer the latter because I think keeping the meaning as close to literal as possible increases the clarity of the words and because the term AI is now thrown about so often these days as a buzzword for clicks or money, typically by people pushing lies about the capabilities or functionality of the systems they’re referring to as AI.

The lumping together of models trained by scientists to solve novel problems and the models that are using the energy of a small country to plagiarize artwork also is not something I view fondly as I’ve seen people assume the two are one in the same despite the fact one has redeeming qualities and the other is mostly bullshit.

However, it seems that many others are fine with or in support of a descriptivist definition where words have the meaning they are used for even if that meaning goes beyond their original intent or definitions.

To each their own I suppose. These preferences are opinions so there really isn’t an objectively right or wrong answer for this debate

The term “artificial intelligence” is supposed to refer to a computer simulating the actions/behavior of a human.

LLMs can mimic human communication and therefore fits the AI definition.

Generative AI for images is a much looser fit but it still fulfills a purpose that was until recently something most or thought only humans could do, so some people think it counts as AI

However some of the earliest AI’s in computer programs were just NPCs in video games, looong before deep learning became a widespread thing.

Enemies in video games (typically referring to the algorithms used for their pathfinding) are AI whether they use neural networks or not.

Deep learning neural networks are predictive mathematic models that can be tuned from data like in linear regression. This, in itself, is not AI.

Transformers are a special structure that can be implemented in a neural network to attenuate certain inputs. (This is how ChatGPT can act like it has object permanence or any sort of memory when it doesn’t) Again, this kind of predictive model is not AI any more than using Simpson’s Rule to calculate a missing coordinate in a dataset would be AI.

Neural networks can be used to mimic human actions, and when they do, that fits the definition. But the techniques and math behind the models is not AI.

The only people who refer to non-AI things as AI are people who don’t know what they’re talking about, or people who are using it as a buzzword for financial gain (in the case of most corporate executives and tech-bros it is both)

I have literally started to add every thought in my head into obsidian and already it feels like someone could probably recreate my mind from it lol

The best ADHD feature is the ability to link notes, even ones that done exist. So if you have a really specific idea about some topic you can just write it down, link it to the topic, and then get back to whatever task you were doing when the thought arose. Then when you have time you can find the idea again as long as you remember the topic or topics you linked it too

Already made up my mind and got a rotring 600. Plan to use it till the brass erodes

This is why you can taste/smell saline when it’s injected. Trace amounts of dissolved things (which taste like plastic and metal) in the saline are able to pass through the alveoli in the lungs and evaporate into your breath.

Oddly, I think it’s a similar thing with my ADHD meds because about an hour or two after taking them my breath smells/tastes weird.

Could you expand on what you mean by modular web technologies? Also when would you say the shift over from interoperable web technologies to one-stop-shop happened?

I’m relatively young and wasn’t really allowed on the internet, but from what I remember (trying to build websites on the old family computer in the basement lol) there were lots of issues with browsers not working with the same CSS properties circa 2016. Then again I had no idea what I was doing at the time so maybe it wasn’t so bad.

YouTube seemed to start going down hill shortly after that, followed swiftly by other apps and sites.

Basically as soon as I got consistent internet access it seemed like the internet was getting worse, but it seemed like lots of interoperability/compatibility issues were resolved over the decline in quality of the content of the net.

Again, I didn’t have much experience with the old net so I want to know your perspective

While fitting, there are many more things in life besides the internet could be called “capitalism fucked up everything.” Better to call it “capitalism fucked over the net” otherwise people could call Healthcare, climate change, fascism, most wars, pollution, etc. Web3.0 which might be confusing lol

Valid, and good shirt idea, but turning web3.0 into a derogatory term for corpo shit would be the opposite of marketing language yes?

Start talking about something and get so lost on tangents trying to explain all the precursory information they need to understand that original thing I haven’t explained yet that I’m now debating something entirely unrelated and have forgotten the original point I’m trying to make.

Bonus points if I end up losing my train of thought during one of the tangents and now don’t even know what I said two seconds ago and have still forgotten the original point I was trying to make.

Also not being able to do simple things I plan/need to do, like laundry or writing an email, but then spend 4hrs straight building something incredibly complex from scratch just to test a random theory I had that has no other usefulness.

If it wasn’t clear, I’m well aware of the unlikelihood of the situation. But what’s the harm in believing such? I mean it’s not like either of them is going to come back from the dead and say: “Actually, we argued about the internal weight distribution from astronaut motion, how it would effect the natural frequency of the capsule, and if that effect would be significant enough to need accounting for, not racism.”

Fun fact, my grandfather was a leading engineer on the Saturn V and other aerospace projects, and according to my dad he apparently got into arguments with Von Braun. Considering the line of work and knowing some of my grandfather’s written down arguments from that time, it’s likely these arguments were more about random physics than anything else, but I like to think it was about von Braun being a Nazi piece of shit.

I do know my grandparents were very against segregation to the chagrin of their neighbors, so it’s not entirely unlikely right?

This is the second best benefit of my meds. I can keep lists now and actually just do things, so if I feel this way I just start making a list of all the major to-do things I can think of and a list of all the stuff I kind of feel like I should do. Just putting it into a list helps because I then feel more confident I know what needs to get done. Plus I can break down the big things into smaller steps now which is useful.

I definitely tried doing this kind of stuff before getting medicated but it didn’t work. Gotta love how every piece of advice for dealing with ADHD shit only is an option if you don’t have ADHD to begin with.

It’s the start of the semester, and this is me. Unfortunately I’m feeling it even while on my meds :( I think I’ve become tolerant to them.

nvme0n1p1

100% of murdering lunatics breathe air.

Do with that what you will.

Not sure about lust specifically though I suppose it’s possible to hyperfocus on it.

However, getting off is definitely something ADHD people can feel the urge to self medicate with. It is pretty strong stimulation, activating both dopaminergic and adrenal pathways (I think) which are the two that ADHD meds try to trigger to alleviate symptoms.

Furthermore, it helps with those under-stimulation days because it is stimulation, but can also help with overstimulation days because sex activates both the sympathetic AND parasympathetic nervous system. (it acts as both an upper and a downer) So it helps you relax and feel less stressed/irritable.

Sidenote: Nicotine is one of the only drugs that activates both pathways like this and surprise surprise it’s also something I’ve heard several ADHD people use to self medicate with or that they would use to help them focus before they realized they had ADHD.

Imagine someone says something rude you want to reply to but don’t/can’t. This is annoying but normally you just move on. Sure maybe you’ll think about it a little while later or maybe while in the shower later that day or maybe it will come back you randomly while laying in bed sometime in the future. Still normal (I think…) and pretty manageable.

However, with the right (or wrong) kind of neurodivergence, some days it isn’t possible to let go. Even the slightest annoyance will invade your focus the entire rest of the day. You can’t do anything because you’re just pissed about that thing, or pissed that you’re still thinking about that dumb thing for no reason and can’t get it out of your head. You get mad at being mad. Anger spiral ensues.

Rage wells within you as your frustration rises because you’re trying to focus on other things and this annoyance isn’t worth your time, but you can’t stop because you’re not in control. It’s like a song stuck in your head but even harder to get rid of.

If you’re like me, self destructive fantasies play in your mind to relieve the feeling. This does work but it takes time. Once the anger spiral is gone you feel dumb because like why the fuck did I just spend four fucking hours imagining global conquest because I tripped over my words answering a question in lecture this morning?

Anyway I think this is kind of related to hyper focus. Basically your mind decides—without and/or against your will—to focus on something that angers you all day. You feel the desire to do something about it, but you can’t, and you can’t even really stop focusing on it no matter what you try, so you just get more mad.

Unfortunately it often happens when I’m stressed to begin with because I have tasks I need to get done, but then that stress just feeds the fire. Meditation might be helpful but the most effective option I’ve found is to put on phonk or metal or vocaloid songs that are very fast and loud or violent then imagine acting on my anger till I’ve exhausted all the rage. Once it feels boring to stay mad, I can get back to doing my tasks. Again, this takes time and is probably not the healthiest way to cope, but it works for me so maybe it’ll work for other ADHD peeps who want a solution.

I’m bored so let’s imagine an example. Enter a truly exotic organism: nuclear power life form. We don’t have anything like this on earth but we can imagine one just the same.

First we know we need a way to draw radioactive elements from whatever soil or rock we’re on. We want to maximize surface area for the transfer of ions so we’ll build tube like structures to absorb nuclear elements and transport them into our reactor organ. We’ll want to minimize the radiation leaks otherwise we’ll die so we’ll need a working fluid system and heat transfer chamber and a system for dissipating that heat and in the process creating chemical energy.

For the chamber we can build special structures to hold the “rods” with structures using fluid pressure to move the control rods (or surfaces) between them. The most optimal solution for waste disposal is to grow the rods from their base and then have specialized cells that travers the rods and wear them down at the ends, collecting material that has spent the most time in the reactor, and then have those cells leaving our body through a specialized opening. A similar process can ensure the walls of the chamber never become unstable due to neutron damage.

The solid portions of these structures will need to be strong but light and be easily removed by chemical reaction. We know this kind of structure is possible because it’s literally how bones work. Maybe there’s a more efficient chemical reaction to use like the production of silicate surfaces but I doubt it.

These rods will be relatively heavy and we want them to orient naturally otherwise we’ll be doing extra work so if we assume gravity exists, we’ll build the reactor vertically. We can then build separate rocky structures to support the chamber that don’t need changing as often.

Lastly we need a method for heat transfer, assuming there is an atmosphere, we could just use fleshy flexible membranes to do this. Assuming we are in a more viscous fluid that allows good heat transfer, we could pump the fluid through us to exchange the heat. Or in the absence of atmosphere we could build a specialized large surface area sheet that can radiate heat into space effectively. Again calcium carbonate works for this purpose but so would some metals or a wide variety of materials if we don’t need to worry about electromagnetic radiation from a star.

Water as the working fluid would be optimal as its incompressibility would give us better options for raising the control rods. Furthermore it’s one of the most common fluids in the entire universe.

We could deal with high pressure easily but low pressure would require a more rigid structure probably with a near spherical shape if we really want to maximize efficiency like life does.

Now the only thing left to deal with is reproduction. This is actually relatively simple if we don’t have an atmosphere or we have one that isn’t dense: build a smaller version of ourself with some starting plutonium, put it in a specialized channel, open the back of the channel to superheated water and let the expansion of steam yeet our child a long distance. That way it won’t compete with us for resources.

Sure likely the egg would need to be built with some odd shape to deal with the impact and to make sure some viable roots made it below the surface but that shouldn’t be too hard.

Anyway this has been a very fun little exercise, but more importantly, I created life that wasn’t at all based around life on earth (the mention of bones was a proof of concept, the idea of solid structures is definitely not just earth specific). It doesn’t need to exist in an earth like environment, and it mostly doesn’t look like life on earth.

There are probably some more organic ways to structure things besides rods, like interlocking spirals, but other than that everything else earth-like is literally just from applied physics. Not just the roots but even like pushing the fluid around would only be efficient if it was done like it is inside us. How will we push our fluid around? Through tubes that undergo peristalsis. That’s not because I think things have to act like humans but because humans are bound by physics and physically, that’s the best way to move large amounts of fluids in a body (assuming you can’t construct an optimized turbine  and compressor of course).

We definitely can never say we know what ALL aliens will look like, but it’s almost guaranteed that if there is life in the universe, some of it will look like the life we have here. And all of it will be designed the way it is because of its environment, an environment whose physics can be understood. We can and possibly already have thought up some life that isn’t on earth but is somewhere else in the universe.