I'm half way through this article. The word 'introspection' might be better replaced with 'prior internal state'. However, it's made me think about the qualities that human introspection might have; it seems ours might be more grounded in lived experience (thus autobiographical memory is activated), identity, and so on. We might need to wait for embodied AIs before these become a component of AI 'introspection'. Also: this reminds me of Penfield's work back in the day, where live human brains were electrically stimulated to produce intense reliving/recollection experiences. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilder_Penfield]
Regardless of some unknown quantum consciousness mechanism biological brains might have, one thing they do that current AIs don't is continuous retraining. Not sure how much of a leap it is but it feels like a lot.
Beyond consumer-producer relationships, there are many instances where an individual is required to deal with a baroque interface, as I just did when starting to look after an ill parent and figure out what care they could get from the local and state governments; there are forms, definitions to get one's head around, high stakes (get it wrong and you could be breaking the law), and so on. An AI in this case was incredibly helpful, particularly when I was overloaded cognitively and emotionally. There is no particular incentive on the other end of the citizen-government relationship for the government to obfuscate things, but things are sometimes very complicated and provided in verbose language. For those interactions, for that asymmetry, an AI will be very useful.
Indeed. But the unintended consequence (perhaps) of LLMs making things easier to use is that more people will use them - basically Jevons paradox.
I would expect that this will cause certain programs to see more demand than the creators anticipated for (extrapolating previous trends), which might require changes in the programs (i.e. more people apply for benefits than expected, benefits / application might have to be cut, etc).
And in some ways there's a Cantillon effect (though traditionally associated with proximity to the "money printer", but here the proximity is to the LLM-enablement; in that those who use the LLMs first can get the benefit before the rules are changed).
A quick note to say that at our local repair cafe we do a roaring trade in vacuum repairs for peanuts (not literal peanuts; though some of our repairers do get peckish). If you're in Europe, there's chance you have one nearby. https://repaircafe.org/en
Could you please go in to a bit more detail on how you set that up, how you handle issues, etc? I'm a member of a makerspace, and there's been discussions about doing something similar. There's just not a consensus about how to go about it.
...generally I've seen weekly/monthly "fix-it" workshops as a kindof open-house / membership drive.
Probably best to 1) have people sign safety waivers, especially if they're not members 2) have people sign a "we can offer to help you try, but your widget might end up worse than before" waiver 3) run it as a volunteer outreach event with a focus on getting membership rather than a transactional "fix my ____ for free" outcome
My summer project for my comp sci MSc was an open source natural deduction helper tool for the Mac, called Baker Street. I let it lapse simply because I didn't have time to look after it, but now it's available for download once more: https://apps.apple.com/gb/app/baker-street/id1528304157
My codebase contains a lot of Objective-C but I'm slowly replacing it with Swift. I rarely write Objective-C (largely because it's so easy to introduce bugs with release/retain shenanigans) unless I really have to. Interoperability between the languages does work but is fragile, with Xcode often getting into a chicken-and-egg state where a compilation error in Swift prevents the Objective-C from compiling, and vice versa, stuffing the interface with errors that can make it hard to discover where the problem is.
I like the idea but I’d prefer the flirting off by default. Also, I asked for a simple lunch appointment tomorrow and it suggested the lunch but added a reservation for later in the afternoon.
I see what you mean - five will fit with more room left over. But much like a hand that has a capacity to hold 7 or so marbles, if you grasp only five at a time, your overall productivity will (almost certainly) slow.
It's a bit tricky to tell what you're doing exactly - perhaps drop me an email if you have any queries (using this account; my original parent post was on a throwaway account because I had login problems).
