Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re: What I don't like about Dawkins (Score 1) 302

You misunderstand the argument. The argument is that the computer + software + data is a fully deterministic automaton. The claim is that you could find out that it has consciousness. But finding that out would mean that computer + software + data would need to behave differently than computer + software + data + consciousness. If they behave the same, you cannot detect consciousness because it makes no difference.

You presume without evidence computer + software + data cannot embody consciousness. Then you complete the circular argument by asserting computer + software + data != computer + software + data + consciousness.

But computer + software + data is already fully deterministic and would immediately crash if consciousness were to change its behavior. Computers are like that on a very extreme level.

The only thing that has crashed here is basic logic.

Comment Re:What I don't like about Dawkins (Score 1) 302

If it is deterministic, it is an automaton.

What is the point of labeling something an automaton?

No consciousness in there that could be detected, perfect repeatability, everything determined by hardware, software and data.

How do you know consciousness requires nondeterminism? What is the basis for this assertion?

Consciousness can only manifest (be detected) if it makes a difference.

What is the point of saying something can only be detected if it is detectable?

Obviously so.

That's an understatement.

If it makes a difference, the machine is not an the basic automaton anymore and it will behave different than determined by the hardware, software and data.

This is self sealing gibberish.

Note that whether consciousness is deterministic or not does not matter at all to this argument.

I'm asking what the relevance of determinism is WRT consciousness arguments and you are saying the issue itself is irrelevant? WTF is up with this crap?

Comment Re:Use Argon2id (Score 1) 70

MFA on top of user/password is still helpful though. Obviously, if someone gets phished, that's difference. But phishing is social engineering and not actually defeating the encryption.

I doubt we'll ever solve phishing unless we get rid of the human element but without the human element, what's the point?

The solution to phishing is SAS + secure authentication (e.g. ZKP)

What passes for security on the Internet (cleartext password transmission over "secure" channels) is the reason phishing is the worlds number one security threat. The worlds users have been trained to accept insanely dangerous behavior as normal.

What is especially pathetic many of the "MFA" schemes employed today are not even resistant to verifier impersonation.

Comment Re:Rethinking our approach (Score 1) 70

A traditional login system throttles based on the endpoint (ie, the IP address or a specific browser cookie.)

I've never implemented a system like this where throttling would be based on anything other than login.

And if you lock an account after a certain number of incorrect guesses... we're back to the DoS situation, where anyone who knows or can guess your login name (often your email address) can lock you out of your account.

Throttling requests means if someone knows your username and has sufficient access to attempt login then yes they absolutely can keep you from logging in. Doing otherwise is insecure. If denial of service is a problem guard usernames.

As Tablizer mentioned there should be single purpose authenticators isolated from app servers for handling user authentication. It is unrealistic to expect passwords to contain required entropy to survive an offline brute force campaign regardless of algorithm or amplification scheme.

Comment Re:What I don't like about Dawkins (Score 1) 302

What is the point of these arguments? ... Why is "determinism" relevant?

"This CANNOT be overstated. LLMs are software, they execute on machines that are entirely deterministic and do not work unless they are. Non-determinism is literally simulated in AI. This must be said over and over." - dfghjk

IE: introducing a "real nondeterministic random number generator" does not change the fact that the entire system is dependent on its deterministic nature. Setting that to a static value proves that the system is deterministic. That's why I showed the example.

When you get around to answering the question why determinism is even relevant please do let me know.

Comment Re:the Turing test already passed (Score 1) 302

Are there capabilities something that is conscious has that something that isn't doesn't? If so care to enumerate them?

Consciousness can influence physical reality...
Seriously. Got any other dumb questions that show you did not even read the definition?

I have several.

1. WHY are you PRESUMING consciousness **REQUIRES** nondeterminism?

2. If one presumes for the sake of argument consciousness requires nondeterminism so what? Lots of nondeterministic things "influence physical reality". Who cares? How is your statement at all responsive to my question? What capabilities does something that is conscious have that something which is not conscious does not? Why can't you answer the question?

Comment Re:Conciousness isn't as mysterious as you thought (Score 2) 302

Wrong. The deterministic behavior means there is no consciousness in there with any effect at all.

What is the objective basis for the assertion consciousness requires nondeterminism?

Consciousness with no effect cannot be detected.

Can consciousness be detected? Is there an objective test for its presence of absence?

Comment Re:What I don't like about Dawkins (Score 1) 302

FALSE (assuming same prompt means they're passing the same initialization seed).

      "options": {
                "seed": 32988
        },

That will print the same random numbers on subsequent calls. It's faking it to make you think it's nondeterministic, and it seems to have fooled you (and maybe even Dawkins).

What is the point of these arguments?

All you have done was seeded a PRNG with a known value to make it deterministic. The system could be driven by a real nondeterministic random number generator derived by real thermal noise. What difference does it make? This is a pointless implementation detail that isn't relevant to anything.

Why is "determinism" relevant?

Comment Re:Octogenarian Doesn't Understand AI (Score 1) 302

Indeed. In particular, what he does not understand is that LLMs are fully deterministic.

What difference does it make whether a system is deterministic or not? What does this have to do with its capabilities?

That means any consciousness in there has absolutely no effect and hence would be impossible to detect from observation.

This is one of the most craziest of non-sequiturs I've heard all week.

Comment Re:The classic web development problem. (Score 1) 182

All you say is true and yet there is still no excuse for this. The feds have plenty of competently developed websites. Then they have other pieces of dogshit like this. The FCC licensing database is one of the shittiest websites which ever existed. There's no excuse for that either.

No worries, 18F is on the case.

Comment Re:You really are dedicated to missing the point (Score 1) 134

I have got to give you credit for that dedication I guess.
Yes opposition was boiling over. Keyword was. Past tense.

Opposition has only increased.

I feel like you are desperately trying to defend Donald Trump and don't want to because you're ashamed of it. You should be ashamed of defending Trump. That's a good impulse and you should run with it

I guess this is a feature of cognitive dissonance where people have such a need to protect their world view they begin to wholesale reject entire domains for irrelevant reasons. Kind of the f*** you and your little dog too response. As if the little dog had anything to do with anything.

This is what you are doing now with an inability to separate Trump being a an amoral dumbass with present day reality. If Trump is doing something or takes some position it it must be bad. Any analysis or research never gets past that point. Anything to do with Iran also suffers from the Gaza / Israeli issue which causes leftists to blow a gasket. And so you end up with people like yourself buying the idiotic talking points of oppressors and mass murders because they can't keep their cognitive dissonance in check.

Comment Re:Iranian citizens don't care about anything (Score 1) 134

You cannot create a local opposition when the entire country is under siege. No country on the planet isn't going to rally in the face of that and any government is going to be able to use that to consolidate their power. Just like how Bush Jr after 9/11 was able to score a second term even though by that point people hated him in the economy was in free fall.

Regime opposition is not being generated from outside Iran, it already boiled over and reached a critical mass inside of the country in late December before the bloody massacres and subsequent US attacks. Everyone who matters (RP,DT,BB,CENTCOM...etc) have stated the obvious recommending people hold off for a safer time. Meanwhile people are organizing and getting shit together.

Comment Re: This is an astonishingly bad idea (Score 1) 134

Why would I do that?

It was just a suggestion. My intention was trying to be helpful and point out new possibilities you may have not previously considered.

I just support the U.S. ending its constant effort to destabilize and destroy every other country.

When you support Russia's war of conquest against Ukraine you are doing something else entirely.

Comment Re: This is an astonishingly bad idea (Score 1) 134

This is from the perspective of someone who is supportive of both China and Russia. I don't want the U.S. to be involved in Ukraine. I don't want the U.S. to be involved in Taiwan.

If you support Russia move there and join the SMO. They will give you citizenship and a signing bonus of several million rubbles.

Slashdot Top Deals

((lambda (foo) (bar foo)) (baz))

Working...