Thinking, thesis and synthesis, syllogism, poesy or prose: in all these things I am far better than an LLM.
But even were I not, I would still insist on doing them myself. An abnegation, an abdication of yourself, to do otherwise. A little suicide. If I speak to you yet you act a mere frontend for Claude, what’s the point of you?
But for coding? Sure, if the tool works. But I expect its ideas will never be new.
Ah, friend, America was importing people from Africa. Indeed “import” is rather more apt in this case than the several other you’ve ignored (e.g. the mass immigration from Vietnam at the finish of that war).
What a horridly dull country it would be were your understanding nearer the truth; what a betrayal of its dream to wish it as you see it; how silly you would seem to your know-nothing antecedents so lumping “Europeans” as one (it is an irony that in their comparatively more nuanced racialism they at least understood a little more of that continent’s ethnic and cultural diversity).
> we never were really communicating that well to begin with?
We were not. A majority of humanity has been merely semiliterate since at least the advent of radio. As this came before secondary (high school) education became ubiquitous, I suspect that sublime, true literacy has only ever belonged to a minority.
And, of course, language is wholly imperfect to its purposes, a perpetual kludgery, even when commanded by the purest poet.
The bicameral hypothesis seems impossible to me. Consciousness must precede language, no? The invention and use of the latter is impossible without some theory of mind, which requires first a theory of self. Therefore language cannot be integral to the advent of consciousness.
Unlikely. Adaptability of the language to new concepts as well as ease of adoption for second language learners matters. English - indeed every other candidate global language (Spanish, French, Portuguese, Arabic) - excel Chinese in these respects. I’d wager that even we’re American hegemony to go the way of the UK, English will persist. It may become more Indian or Singlish, but this demonstrates its strength.
And I suppose this world-historically rich Afrikaner is prepared to pay the high personal taxes required for such a scheme, no? Words speak loud than actions, no? He will not be troubled by the skin color of recipients (“universal”), yes?
Genuinely regrettable. The appointed life peers system is worse than the traditional ‘hereditary sortition’ (if you will).
The former creates a class of semi-sinecures of equally questionable quality yet beholden to the political system of the moment. Life peerages become awards for donors and loyalists, a legitimized corruption. The house’s composition becomes an ever-growing competition based on unlimited partisan appointment. The house becomes less thoughtful, more unwieldy, more pointless, more expensive. It will inevitably be abolished on this path.
In contrast aristocrats are at least less likely to owe anything to a special interest, and more likely to hold firm to unpopular but perhaps higher ideals: they owe their position to no other power center, neither voters nor parties. They are also inherently invested in the nation’s long term success. It’s hardly democratic but at least it’s not a wasteful partisan circus.
My pitch would be to keep a small number of intra-peerage elected hereditary peers, keep the bishops, add various ex officio academics - but fill the majority of seats by true sortition. Every British subject is liable to be drafted, and paid, into a year or two of part-time lordship. (Though I’d grant the whole house a right to easily expel such members, should they fail to meet basic expectations.)
The blog is not a safe place for the overly literal mind. You must accept the glib overstatement and the poetic lie. There’s a reason he caused a paroxysm among the rationalists.
> Earlier today I was asking Gemini to find me a nearby bar that would optimize for price, tastiness of drinks, and “not making me feel lonely as a solo traveler on Valentine’s day.”
…this sort of behavior I don’t believe I understand. It seems a silly abdication of living one’s own life. Here’s a poem from just me.
I’d pay a premium for the works of authors who despise it, if it existed; I reckon this would be a signal of their quality.