Thank you, Janet!

This is a subject near and dear to my heart. As a long-time plotter with chronic worldbuilder's disease, I often wondered if I'd ever actually write the book(s) I planned. I'm finally there. And finally about ready to start sharing.

And I want to thank World Anvil!

The number of assumptions you keep making is astounding. And truthfully, making it impossible to actually *communicate* with you.

Dude, the mere fact that you are parsing the number of sentences illustrates a fundamental failure on your part to understand how language itself works.

I was trying to have a friendly discussion, but you and others have reached a level of condescension that makes it no longer worth my time.

No, I would argue our physical senses *sense* physical reality. In order to convey that to another human, we use language. So that a person who can't see might still understand the concept. How would that be possible without words, if they could never actually *see*?

At what point did I say it was a "fellow intelligence"?

I'm arguing that it's a very useful tool capable of being extraordinarily helpful (or dangerous). But more importantly, I'm arguing that it is far less simple than it is being dismissed as. It doesn't fit neatly into a box.

Let's take your statement at face value. If it is correct, then this screenshot is of a language that must already exist somewhere (which I doubt, but won't rule out). I invented the name, basic structure, and a handful of words. The LLM invented the formal structure and majority of the vocab.

I think you're oversimplifying.

Words are concepts. Phrases have meaning that can change the interpretation of a word.

We use (teaching, books) to describe physical reality. To create any group of words that has meaning specific to a prompt, it has to parse how the words relate to one another.

Yes, of course my brain realized there was a connection. That's not under debate. But to think it the result of "randomization" is cynical and dismissive of what is actually happening.

More like reading a book, I'd say. Like a book, its incumbent upon the reader to question the conclusions.

I agree there is a lot of crazy ideas out there, but are you saying an LLM can't accelerate pattern discovery by a human by themself, that a person *must* have a human being to find that pattern, is that right?

Because it sounds like you're saying that people who claim to have become mentally ill.

When I ask for it, I absolutely can get invented words. (Gemini, not chatGPT)

So, when I build a system model that leads to making a connection between two seemingly unrelated ideas presented by the LLM, the LLM had no role in my discovery? I might never have had the realization without the LLM.

I disagree, somewhat. An AI can easily help someone clever to make disparate connections they may not have on their own, or not without a lot of work.

So, if someone finds a novel idea made with disparate ideas they connected using an AI, did the AI come up with the idea, or did the person?

So does that mean that calling a fascist authoritarian a Nazi with supporting symbology is no longer something that can be claimed by the right as "violent rhetoric"? :)

I totally agree!

My partner and I have been working on a non-dogmatic, self-correcting, AI Alignment model built on principles instead of rules. I just don't know how to go about truly testing it. But ideally, an AI just simply wouldn't let a human knowingly use it for ill.

You're right. Birth from death, new from old, strength from pain, light from dark...and each of those is a circle, not just a line.

There will be a phoenix, and it too will one day die. The question is, can we do better the next time we have a phoenix ascend?

Agreed.

I just hate how much collateral damage is being done in the process :(

Why would he want to hear about affordability? He already got what he wanted from the voters and he's probably gambling that his game will still result in not needing them ever again. I think tolerance for his shenanigans is finally losing steam.

Yes, I think I've watched that happen to many people :)

The Radical Left are going to shut down the government and inflict massive pain on the American people unless we return our theft of $1.5 trillion from the healthcare of millions of vulnerable Americans. The Trump administration wants to scapegoat a minority party because their majority can't agree.

The Radical Left are going to shut down the government and inflict massive pain on the American people unless we return our theft of $1.5 trillion from the healthcare of millions of vulnerable Americans. The Trump administration wants to scapegoat a minority party because their majority can't agree.