Jump to content

Featured Replies

Just now, Boogyman said:

So what science are we supposed to discuss here? The poor CGI?

Why do I always forget that part?

 

 

6 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

He was convinced of this solely based on a few conversations with a chatbot? That's no more real than a well-modeled deep fake video is real. 

6 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I guess the Turing Test isn’t sufficient after all…

 

There's no consensus standard for an actual turing test and there wasn't even a second human providing control responses. This is all nonsense, chatbots have been around for years, this is just a more advanced one that is good at providing more superficially profound and thought provoking responses. 

Totally different fields, but if we want to indulge in sci-fi, the progress in robotics as evidenced by the stuff Boston Dynamics demos blows the doors off this chatbot.

2 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

There's no consensus standard for an actual turing test and there wasn't even a second human providing control responses. This is all nonsense, chatbots have been around for years, this is just a more advanced one that is good at providing more superficially profound and thought provoking responses. 

Totally different fields, but if we want to indulge in sci-fi, the progress in robotics as evidenced by the stuff Boston Dynamics demos blows the doors off this chatbot.

Yeah, it’s a joke. Clearly there is no "ghost in the machine” here.

9 hours ago, we_gotta_believe said:

There's no consensus standard for an actual turing test and there wasn't even a second human providing control responses. This is all nonsense, chatbots have been around for years, this is just a more advanced one that is good at providing more superficially profound and thought provoking responses. 

Totally different fields, but if we want to indulge in sci-fi, the progress in robotics as evidenced by the stuff Boston Dynamics demos blows the doors off this chatbot.

I work with chatbots. This appears beyond a simple NLP/ML mashup 

My guess is that it's faked to some degree, but it's still spooky.

1 hour ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I work with chatbots. This appears beyond a simple NLP/ML mashup 

My guess is that it's faked to some degree, but it's still spooky.

I bet there are some simple questions we could come up with that would throw it for a loop. My guess is that it would struggle with anything that has innuendo or a slight bit of ambiguity, whereas a human control would pick right up on it. 

"What do you like about the spring?"

"Tell me about your favorite childhood memory of a wise relative that has passed."

"Are you cuckoo for cocoa puffs?"

And in terms of expressing emotions, humor and trauma are probably the trickiest to mimic.

On 5/10/2022 at 6:10 AM, Toastrel said:

Incredibly Sharp Webb Space Telescope Test Images Hint at New Possibilities for Science

https://scitechdaily.com/incredibly-sharp-webb-space-telescope-test-images-hint-at-new-possibilities-for-science/

Webb MIRI and Spitzer Comparison Image

Comparison of a Webb Space Telescope Mid-Infrared Instrument image of the Large Magellanic Cloud and a past image of the same view using the Spitzer Space Telescope Infrared Array Camera. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech (left), NASA/ESA/CSA/STScI (right)

 

I'm excited to see what the Webb can do.

False.  I was told we know the vast majority of astrophysicists and only 0.0000000000001% is not yet understood   :rolleyes:    

 

We really have some of the dumbest know it all's here :roll: 

28 minutes ago, paco said:

False.  I was told we know the vast majority of astrophysicists and only 0.0000000000001% is not yet understood   :rolleyes:    

 

We really have some of the dumbest know it all's here :roll: 

That was in reference to aliens have visiting our solar system, dumb ass. Read slower, so that your brain has enough time to catch up to the words on the screen.

4 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

That was in reference to aliens have visiting our solar system, dumb ass. Read slower, so that your brain has enough time to catch up to the words on the screen.

You literally stated that we know pretty much everything there is to know and that's why it's impossible.  Great take :roll: 

"the vast majority of astrophysicists"  puddin head says :lol:

3 minutes ago, paco said:

You literally stated that we know pretty much everything there is to know and that's why it's impossible.  Great take :roll: 

No, I said from what we know of the relationship between space, time, and energy, the likelihood of aliens visiting our solar system is basically zero. Words, read them.

It is definitely unlikely aliens have visited our solar system.

Lil' Puddin' head wants words

On 4/28/2021 at 9:47 AM, we_gotta_believe said:

Aliens have never visited our solar system. Period. Everything we know about physics and our place in the universe rules this out as a possibility now and in the foreseeable future. To think otherwise is either incredibly naive or ignorant. Fun for movies or to sell a book, but ridiculous if meant to be taken seriously.

 

On 4/28/2021 at 9:57 AM, paco said:

Ah, I see your mistake.  You think we know everything about physics and the universe around us.

 

On 4/28/2021 at 10:01 AM, we_gotta_believe said:

Not me, the vast majority of astrophysicists. I mean, if it makes you feel better to call it 0.0000000000001% instead of absolute zero, then sure. 

 

On 4/28/2021 at 10:02 AM, paco said:

Can the vast majority of astrophysicists accurately describe dark matter and how it can potentially be harvested?

 

On 4/28/2021 at 10:04 AM, we_gotta_believe said:

Oh ok. 0.00000000000002%, fair point.

 

On 4/28/2021 at 10:28 AM, paco said:

Well, it is estimated that it accounts for 85% of all matter.....

 

 

That's not what I said, what I said was [backpeddling followed by insult]
 

Straight out of his playbook.  Next comes grammar correcting following by stomping off :lol: 

3 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

It is definitely unlikely aliens have visited our solar system.

Only 10 billion others to explore 

2 minutes ago, paco said:

Lil' Puddin' head wants words

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That's not what I said, what I said was [backpeddling followed by insult]
 

Straight out of his playbook.  Next comes grammar correcting following by stomping off :lol: 

The context was about aliens visiting our solar system, not literally everything about the universe itself. :roll: 

4 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

It is definitely unlikely aliens have visited our solar system.

Unlikely vs stating it's virtually impossible because we know just about everything are two completely different takes.  Yours is reasonable.  The other is from feelings backed by sheer ignorance.  

48 minutes ago, DaEagles4Life said:

Only 10 billion others to explore 

Yeah but 1 out of 10 billion means there's still a chance they'd visit ours regardless of the energy and time it requires to travel such distances!

Just now, we_gotta_believe said:

You conveniently didn't quote the posts before this, gee, I wonder why? Oh maybe because the context was about aliens visiting our solar system, not literally everything about the universe itself. :roll: 

Or... because it wasn't directly relevant.  But I can add it if you like.  Still doesn't change your terrible take that we know virtually everything about astrophysics.

 

Maybe its time to rename Dunning Kruger Effect to The WGB Curve.

4 minutes ago, paco said:

Unlikely vs stating it's virtually impossible because we know just about everything are two completely different takes.  Yours is reasonable.  The other is from feelings backed by sheer ignorance.  

No you're right, we apparently don't know enough about physics to effectively rule out such things like aliens visiting us. Likewise, we don't know enough about evolution to rule out we didn't evolve from dinosaurs or enough about radiology to rule out that the earth is more than 6,000 years old. Unless you have learned literally everything about every aspect of some subject, no conclusions can be drawn in the interim. I recant my point, paco, you've changed my mind. :roll:

Just now, paco said:

Unlikely vs stating it's virtually impossible because we know just about everything are two completely different takes.  Yours is reasonable.  The other is from feelings backed by sheer ignorance.  

Yeah I used the word unlikely on purpose. Probably should have said "extremely unlikely". Hell, the odds anyone had or has had even the capability to do so is very unlikely. 

But there is still a very small chance someone had a "magic rock" that allowed them to travel many times the speed of light, came here undetected, looked around while leaving not a piece of evidence they were here, and then left.

15 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

Yeah I used the word unlikely on purpose. Probably should have said "extremely unlikely". Hell, the odds anyone had or has had even the capability to do so is very unlikely. 

But there is still a very small chance someone had a "magic rock" that allowed them to travel many times the speed of light, came here undetected, looked around while leaving not a piece of evidence they were here, and then left.

Also fair. But you aren't claiming we already know everything which is why that take was hilariously stupid. 

Create an account or sign in to comment