So what I said. It can do some things that an LLM is good for but it's not going to compile your code for you or read the time off the system or otherwise interact with the world at all unless it is specifically designed to.

Furthermore, why does he say these ridiculous things if he doesn't get anything out of them?

My impression is that people are buying stocks based on his promises. How long has he been promising full self driving now, and what about going to Mars?

Then you make a bit more money but you also have a bigger mortgage and more of your day is spent commuting. That's not a win, its not even a trade off because the place where you moved is worse for your health. My kid recently went for a trip to LA and she couldn't believe how angry everyone was. It seems competing with millions of people for a postage sized lot and small house and a spot on the subway makes people bitter and that is the last thing I want for me or my family.

How do I get a job tricking wealthy people into giving me billions of dollars for a technology with no real end game?

But what you don't understand is that for some people there is no better job. I know someone who became a store manager and that was a better job. But they had to work 50 hours a week and show up every time one of the employees didn't. They had to work a different shift every day and it took their whole life away because if they weren't sleeping they were working. But that is the only job available that is better.

But my brain is biological, meaning it doesn't work like a computer.

Schitts Creek and Kims Convienence were both really good.

You are talking about the structure of vectors that compose the model. I'm pretty sure that there is no feedback loop to modify the vectors after the model is built. It's not like the AI can assign a vector to a joint. It doesn't work that way.

I cannot read the entire article. Don't know what you are trying to say.

So I know copilot can execute Python code. Are you saying it can also execute Cobol and pl/I and APL and lisp?

Because ChatGPT and most AIs only work with digitally encoded data. The movement of an arm, like turning a dial, implies a translation from digital to real-world analog. Translating digital to interface with an analog world is really hard. Another example would be self-driving.

Except snow is normal so it proves nothing. Rain at this time of year is a difference. Not saying the difference proves anything on its own but it sure contributes to a possible proof.

Because AI cannot do anything it hasn't been programmed to do. When we enter the quit command into a regular program if it doesn't quit then that is called a bug, but when AI is doing it then it is trying to survive? No, people have designed a program that works on data that is so complex they don't even understand it, and they made the poor design choice to put the part they don't understand in front of the internal quit. It's still a bug, but people want to make it something more mystical than that. The complexity of it is basically being used to create plausible deniability that it is still a computer program.

The act of thinking is not based on algorithms as far as I am aware. Do you have studies that prove this? I wasn't aware that we really knew enough of how the brain worked to say that it is similar to storage on a hard drive and running an algorithm. I wasn't aware we knew enough about the human brain's functioning to make comparisons.