AI 2023. Meet ChatGPT. - page 129
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
My premise is that the etymology of the word"information" makes it impossible to attribute it to matter.
What does etymology have to do with it? If there is something (material), it has all information about itself. Cognising this something, we "read" (reflect mentally) some information, forming our inner reflection of this something. Your reasoning leads to the fact that information is only what we can reflect, i.e. subject-dependent phenomenon (there is no observer, so there is no information). Several people have already objected to it. And not just for nothing. I have already given you a link to an interesting video about space and time, at the end of which it is about the fact that matter is information. Spend an hour of your time, you won't regret it!
What does etymology have to do with it? If there is something (material), it has all the information about itself. Cognising this something, we "read" (reflect mentally) some information, forming our inner reflection of this something. Your reasoning leads to the fact that information is only what we can reflect, i.e. subject-dependent phenomenon (there is no observer, so there is no information). Several people have already objected to it. And not just for nothing. I have already given you a link to an interesting video about space and time, at the end of which it is about the fact that matter is information. Spend an hour of your time, you won't regret it!
Porridge.
The idea is clear, but the expression has a logical error. The only thought here is correct: " Cognising this something, we "read" (reflect mentally) some information, forming our internal reflection of this something. ".
We read from the carrier, process it. But matter does not equal information.
Once again: reduce the font of the word "brick". Does that make a brick smaller?
Reduce the font of the word "metre". Does that make a metre smaller?
Write an 8K resolution BMP picture of a 20kg dumbbell on a flash drive. Caption the picture with the caps-locked phrase "KILLER GANTEL KILLER" and crack that thumb drive over your head. Crack your head? Were you able to lift 20 kilos? Did the amount of information on the flash drive change the matter?
Well then you should not call matter information, spare the logic .
But matter does not equal information.
Does matter contain information about itself or not? Let's taste your "porridge" too 🙂 🙂
Does matter contain information about itself or not? Let us taste your "porridge" too 🙂 🙂
No. Matter only contains other matter. Matter "book" contains matter "ink".
You are talking about context: a book contains information, a summons contains information about when and at what address to appear, a Japanese tattoo contains information "dummy", but the bearer of the tattoo doesn't know it, he just asked to get a "funny character".
We are talking about physics, and here the concept "contains" means physical, spatial, material essence. A bottle contains liquid, concrete contains cement. Something that has physical properties. Information does not have physical and material properties.
If you think otherwise, then shake Cheburashka's hand. You can do it.
In this thread I propose to discuss a noisy, perhaps prematurely overblown, but undoubtedly significant event in the field of IT technologies. An event that even hardened sceptics cannot ignore. Scientists, programmers, artists, entrepreneurs, workers. Everyone is watching, thinking or talking about it. It's a media hype event. People are wondering if it will be the beginning of the end of the world or if it will change our lives beyond recognition. But some people think it will fade away and be forgotten.
Technology has changed the world many times in the last decades. People are always waiting for the arrival of a new unexpected chip, invention or discovery. It doesn't matter who or what. So, the public's reaction is natural. But this is a special case. One of the most terrible Sci-fi enemies of mankind has awakened and is looking at us maliciously from the depths of subconsciousness. Nobody knows anything for sure yet and uncertainty is growing. Let's try to understand what we're dealing with. If we succeed, someone will become calmer, and someone on the contrary, will be moved and will start to think what to do. Let's analyse the possibilities, development potential, areas of application of this "enemy" in its current form. What we can do, we will sort out.
And so, a new feature. adaptive, generative, ... GPT chat (just kidding :)).
What actually happened?
The machine, ChatGPT, suddenly spoke to us. Not that this was anything new. Machines have spoken to us before, but this time it spoke to us in a new way. It made EVERYONE uncomfortable (even me, and I'm a sceptic :)). People were scared. Of course, no one will admit it, but read the comments of the YouTube world. There are those who see the fulfilment of the predictions of Musk, Vanga, Nebuchadnezzar.... Some of them think that we will all be paid unemployment benefits, some of them speak with awe about technological singularity and terrible exponential development, and think that they understand what they are talking about, and some of them really understand, but even rational, reasonable people with analytical minds are afraid. Who for a job, for a business, for a startup, for years of study. And what if everything goes down the drain? What if the demand disappears? The opinions of scientists and engineers are divided, as well as the opinions of ordinary people. So what do we do? We accelerate technology like crazy drivers driving a car without brakes down a hill, and in fear and ecstasy enjoy the wind blowing in our faces, while arguing and arguing about how to slow down and not get killed.
Now to the point.
Calmness gives 2 things: absolute ignorance and absolute knowledge. You can't get the former back, you can't fathom the latter. We can NOT reliably know how fast AI technology will progress in the coming years, but having analysed the possibilities, development potential and areas of application today, we will provide ourselves with peace of mind for the near future. In any case, it will be clear what to do or not to do while the AI machine is gaining momentum.
That's why I'm opening this thread.
There is no intelligence here. There are powerful hardware solutions that solve your tasks by selection.
Trolling?
Not for a second ...
I'm trying to have a little fun. But my question is meant in all seriousness.
However, I have to draw your attention to the fact that the question is not about where matter comes from, but "on what basis do you think your matter exists at all?"....
That's the question. Because I don't see any trace of matter.
The answer will sound banal, - on the basis of empirically obtained data.
Arrays of data of interaction with environment come from all sense organs and are transformed by brain into meaningful information, and then, as experience is accumulated, are generalised by intellect into the concept of "matter". Commonplace.
There's no intelligence here. There are powerful hardware solutions that solve your tasks by selection.
That's right. We've been discussing this for the last 123 pages.
That's right. For the last 123 pages we've been discussing this.
And what good has come out of the discussion?
What does etymology have to do with it? If there is something (material), it has all the information about itself. Cognising this something, we "read" (reflect mentally) some information, forming our inner reflection of this something. Your reasoning leads to the fact that information is only what we can reflect, i.e. subject-dependent phenomenon (there is no observer, so there is no information). Several people have already objected to this. And not just for nothing. I have already given you a link to an interesting video about space and time, at the end of which it is about the fact that matter is information. Spend an hour of your time, you won't regret it!
1. I am the only person in this discussion who tries to stick to a clear definition of the concept under discussion. Do you think this is unnecessary?
2. What do you mean,"If there is something (material), it has information about itself"? You have not defined the concept of "information" and dismissed its etymology.
3. I have already given my definition of information. It sounds like this: "information is a product of the nervous activity of living organisms that use it to best adapt to their environment. Information exists only at the level of the interpreter and does not impart new physical properties to the carrier."
4. The video has been watched. Really interesting. There's almost nothing about information, and what there is.... I wish I hadn't heard it. Sorrie. (Black holes are built from bits of information?!)
And what's useful in the output of the discussion?
It's different for everyone.