I think it's an argument about both. If you can't define what a consciousness is, how can you say something doesn't have one?

Vertebrates in general are conscious beings, and said consciousness runs on an analog pattern recognition device. An LLM on the other hand is a digital pattern recognition device. With digital computers being "Turing complete", is it truly unfeasible that with significant software development and computing precision/power (and of course, a precise understanding of how the brain works), a supercomputer could not emulate a human brain? If a computer can successfully emulate a human brain, would that brain not be conscious? Could consciousness occur without all the complicated wetware emulation, and therefore appear in other computer programs?

As AI gets more and more sophisticated, i do think we will get to a point where we cannot truly rule out a computer program being conscious.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

It was hard coded into the GUI format utility by Dave Plummer, as hard drives were small back then and supporting larger drive sizes would make tiny files use exponentially more space on disk.

Then the limitation stuck around for decades because no-one thought to fix it. Notably the limitation didn't exist on on 3rd party OSes. Or for that matter, Windows itself, as it can mount and read/write such partitions fine.

I have never personally reinstalled Windows because it "needs" it. Only when reformatting a laptop for another user etc. Manage your OS properly and these things don't happen. It's not Windows's fault if you click "yes" to every installation popup and enable web notifications from every website your visit.

What are the use cases for local AI models that actually require running on macOS? Surely a commodity x86 system is more appropriate?

Is there even the software support for LLMs on macOS?

Much like the speed of light through a medium varies with the density and optical properties of masses, perhaps C could also be somewhat "plastic" when traveling through "stretched" spacetime where massive gravitational forces warp the perception of time. If you spend your life in a glass block, light traveling through the air around it will certainly look like it's breaking the speed of light through the medium you're familiar with. Sufficiently gravitationally bent spacetime could surely exhibit similar properties. Especially when considering the conditions after the big bang, "constants" like C may be a bit more spacey-wasey timey-wimey than we currently understand.

Don't forget, this period of human observation is absolutely minuscule compared to the total age of even the observable universe. Without obserations taken at geological timescales (or even longer), how can we be certain that the "constants" we are familiar with have always ben constant throughout the history of the universe?

I know some of those words.

As a school IT technician, there's times the Windows 11 start menu stops working entirely.

Just a few years ago the schools were only teaching basic use of word processors and spreadsheets.

And then they axed that, and now we have a generation who can't word process a letter or use excel. Given the amount of receptionist/secretarial, data manager and general managerial jobs well outnumbers programming and computer science jobs, we have a generation of kids who are ill-prepared for the real world they will be entering.

It's not elemental sodium. It's sodium salt, so less poppy boomy.

I say less, as that salt is sodium nitrate

I wholeheartedly agree. And to respond somewhat to the other poster below, using terms like "Treacherous Platform Module", or "Winblows" is fine in an informal forum where the content is created by users, it's a different matter when it's a supposedly professional press release from a serious organization.

By all means, ridicule it, and tear it apart on a technical level, but resorting to name calling is childish and makes your organization seem petty and immature. The FSF struggles enough to make it's point without having their own press release team undermine the noble and important work the FSF are trying to do. There's very few people who actually care about a truly free-as-in-freedom operating system, and using childish name-calling makes it appear that the organization representing free software also don't care and can't take themselves seriously either.

And anyway, most people still using 32-bit time on a 32-bit system at the end of 32-bit time will be "time traveling" to a date in the past anyway, to keep their systems running. Most cases will be either legacy software in VMs, or the retro hobbyist, neither of which should be affected greatly by mismatched dates

Honestly, the systems where this will be an issue are essentially prehistoric. x64 has been supported by essentially every mainstream x86 processor since about 2005. Unless you have a dire need to repartition a Pentium II box, or some ancient Compaq Proliant RAID, this move will have no bearing on most people.

Of course, it might hit those in the retro computing community quite hard, but again, it's not like the i386 versions will cease to exist. You just won't have the latest cutting edge features and support. But again, those users are likely to be using older versions of the software already anyway

How long until we have Fallout-esque robobrains. Seems this sort of computer would be well adapted to powering a humanoid robot, especially with it's learning capabilities. And then how keen are those robots going to be to living a life of servitude. Are we working our way towards a Kaylon threat of our own?

Given a computer is just a very expensive space heater, capturing the "wadte" heat and using it to heat homes is a very sensible idea. "Waste" and "Byproducts" are almost always just "products" waiting for a use.

I used to run Folding@home in the winter on my old dual CPU rig. Definitely helped keep the chill off. In that situation, it was the heat i wanted and the science research was a nice bonus

"Cloud, "NFT", and now "AI"