nrd λx.p

Know the edge. Nothing from memory.

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

Humans have wondered at "unknowability" since at least Socrates.

Thompson got us a non-trivial jump along the way further in 1984.

Yet we never drew the precise boundary til today...

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

It's fine though. I'll just sit here with a critical piece of the puzzle. Don't mind me. I will wait, but we will have this discussion.

I'll just enjoy my permanent underclass in the meantime. Wouldn't want any of that VC money to fund actual science.

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

I'd love to tell you all about this by the way, but unless you're a pop scientist working at an AI firm, grifting the public on moralism and safety, it takes about a year before you can talk about your findings.

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

Humans have wondered at "unknowability" since at least Socrates.

Thompson got us a non-trivial jump along the way further in 1984.

Yet we never drew the precise boundary til today...

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

You'll have to excuse me for not taking anyone too seriously until we build better tools.

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

Being on here again not even a month it's pretty clear these algorithms are a very thick psyop to either try to get you to take part in the false dichotomy of the day, or at least resign yourself from otherwise engaging with any sort of nuance.

Good job humans 💩

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

Accelerating (or not) doesn't fix this, btw

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

Capitalistic zero-sum games in an environment where zero-sum games are now a choice is a hell state, btw.

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

Communistic struggle sessions in an era where information never wanted more badly than to be free is also a hell state, btw

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

Capitalistic zero-sum games in an environment where zero-sum games are now a choice is a hell state, btw.

[Zamicol @zacharycollier]

@C2IRIS A few years ago we were tagging your sentiment with #nocrypto, the point being that systems aren't secure if the cryptography isn't actually secure. You're better off not using cryptography then using it and falsely thinking your secure.

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

@tawnniee shh, you aren't supposed to be smart enough to know about that

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

@loftwah don't bail these idiots out

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

@jjacky Have them build something, then describe how it works, and measure the difference.

[Loftwah @loftwah]

The funniest timeline

Here is our company.

It loses tens of billions of dollars.

It requires hundreds of billions more in compute.

The technology may fundamentally transform humanity.

There is also a non-zero chance it kills everyone.

How many shares would you like?

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

@2Philosophical_ Given that it obscures any hope of measuring its output against our intent, this is actually technically true and cannot be worked around.

The labs rhetorically preach about alignment while doing the precise opposite of what someone who cares about alignment would do.

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

You cannot talk about probabilities with an air of scientific authority, until you actually have a body for your function.

Certainly we shouldn't be paying people to do this.

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

@kssreeram It doesn't seem to be very common, but I'm doing my best at least. 😅

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

@sophianovo_ @2Philosophical_ Precisely yes, very well put.

I should add, my motivation is to diffuse the false dichotomy that pits otherwise very smart people against one another.

I think that's going to do more harm than good at approaching a solution for the unprecendented problems we now face.

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

@wispem_wantex To ignore the budding priesthood is to empower them. Yes they do not typically represent the cutting edge of the field, but they are there, typically enforcing beauacracy. Neither of you are wrong, in other words.

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

@sophianovo_ @2Philosophical_ An exhaustive model is necessary to put the question to rest. Not to discuss plausibility. The "simply can't" is if it is true. It's another way of stating the poshulate itself, a truism, essentially.

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

Only this time we're starting to gain some evidence for the former. E.g.

Huh, M., Cheung, B., Wang, T., & Isola, P. (2024). The Platonic representation hypothesis. Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML 2024). arXiv:2405.07987

Jha, R., Zhang, C., Shmatikov, V., & Morris, J. X. (2025). Harnessing the universal geometry of embeddings. arXiv:2505.12540

Faizal, M., Krauss, L. M., Shabir, A., & Marino, F. (2025). Consequences of undecidability in physics on the theory of everything. Journal of Holography Applications in Physics, 5(2), 10–21. https://t.co/2lljdIO5dy.…

What this means for consciousness directly is not fully determinant until we have the aforementioned model. But it does satisfy plausibility in my definition.

[nrd λx.p @nrdqed]

@sophianovo_ @2Philosophical_ I think "some non-trival empirical evidence exists" would suffice.

We are really returning once again to the argument of Platonism vs. materialism.