who here in academia? any level.
i'm starting my bachelor's essay next week. i'll have two months of time to write about whatever i want, as long as it ends up about 30-35 pages long. i have been interested in ai and artificial consciousness for a while and there is such incredible progress in the field so i think i will use it in some way. thinking about beckett's the unnamable. maybe i can compare his fictional isolated consciousness with artificial consciousness. don't know.
what you researching? writing about? being angry about?(i know it's feminist/gender/postcolonial bitches getting all the buzz)
>bachelor's
>academia
lol ok buddy
>playing go
>incredible progress
>2 months to write 30-35 pages
lmao pussy
>>7825807
If you're interested in AI why don't you actually study computer science and neuroscience and endeavour to work for Deepmind or the Human Brain Project instead of writing an essay no one will read.
Personally I'm not intelligent enough.
Currently in a similar situation of pounding out my MA thesis in like two months. It's on the failure of theoreticians to account for or influence epistemological shifts in how the field deals with a certain subject, and how the vast majority of scholars actually have no rigorous theoretical basis or methodology, but kind of a lazy pastiche of the leftover shrapnel from more conscientious theoretical debates in the past.
Starting my PhD in September also, but I'm narcissistically delusional enough to be worried about people poaching ideas or even dim inspirations for ideas.
The world needs a lot more fucking intellectual contributions on AI from non-technical outsiders. This is kind of a pop-ish recommendation and coming from a non-specialist, but check out Bostrom's Superintelligence if you haven't already. There are serious, serious moral, ontological, and epistemological issues that are COMPLETELY outside the blinders of AI researchers, most of whom are necessarily autistic to be so good at what they do. AI research is basically Lawrence Krauss trying to design God. I don't doubt Krauss' practical intelligence, but whatever the fuck he creates is going to be beyond horrifying.
I honestly think the single greatest moral travesty in human history will be the first time someone switches on a full-brain simulation or something. If there is any kind of world-soul, it's gonna feel that one.
>>7825890
>The world needs a lot more fucking intellectual contributions on AI from non-technical outsiders. This is kind of a pop-ish recommendation and coming from a non-specialist, but check out Bostrom's Superintelligence if you haven't already. There are serious, serious moral, ontological, and epistemological issues that are COMPLETELY outside the blinders of AI researchers, most of whom are necessarily autistic to be so good at what they do. AI research is basically Lawrence Krauss trying to design God. I don't doubt Krauss' practical intelligence, but whatever the fuck he creates is going to be beyond horrifying.
>I honestly think the single greatest moral travesty in human history will be the first time someone switches on a full-brain simulation or something. If there is any kind of world-soul, it's gonna feel that one.
that is literally the opposite of what we need
people like you are why STEMlords get to make fun of humanities retard
this is such a mind boggling retarded perspective that i can't help but feel that the STEMlords are right when they say humanities academia is a joke, speaking as someone in humanities academia
>>7825900
You're right, man. "We need a sophisticated discourse on the issue of AI, which is currently monopolised by biased hyperspecialists with little non-technical or humanistic training" is the exact opposite of the truth. All technology should be designed by people who have spent their entire life burrowing into a narrow hole to realise it, toiling at it to the point of losing all perspective, and then unleashed on the rest of a society that is only less biased about the technology insofar as they've never even thought about it.
ONWARD AND UPWARD! Enjoy your world of demi-conscious proles who have ensouled machine consciousnesses to calculate the amount of syrup to put on their waffles. Clearly what the fin de siecle generation needed was *less* humanistic discourse on the possibility that their metanarrative of progress was flawed.
Seriously, go talk to /sci/ for a while if you want to see the unconscious gestalt of Gasset-intellectuals who are the real motive force behind AI enthusiasm. People who think in terms of
>Once we create unbounded, self-aware meta-intelligence, I'll be able to design the best thermostat ever!!!!
>>7825921
NO FUCK YOU WE NEED PROGRESS
WE NEED ZE BOMB
>>7825921
shut the fuck up dude. my java applet will change the world
>>7825921
>People in engineering and cs
>Hyperspecialists
Most of them can't be fucked to go past undergrad, and have tons of room for elective. Many of them take extensive electives in the humanities because they're (at least many engineers are) well adjusted, well rounded people.
currently a freshman studying finance economics. I plan on being an economics professor at a comfy college, Flagler or Charleston or something where I can relax and live out a literary life while studying and teaching a subject in which I care deeply about. Basically hoping to be a happier Stoner. It's a long journey ahead and I am quite impatient but I should have my bachelors after two more years, then I can set out on my masters & PhD early. Exciting times ahead lad-boys.
I thought AI hype was 10-15 years ago and everyone is a pessimist nowadays
>>7826505
Enjoy linear algebra to Real analysis my friend
I'm writing a paper about deep reinforcement learning. Masters. Not the degree though.
>>7825836
It'a s a jump in progress, it wasn't expected to happen so soon.
>>7826526
I will! I unironically love that type of thing. Anything even remotely related to business analytics is very enjoyable to me. I even tutor in statistics for extra cash.
>>7825890
>>7825921
I don't think you have any idea what this thing hailed as AI is and how it works. It's not really your fault because it isn't communicated well and it's overshadowed by scifi and what we fear and wish for. But get into machine learning a little and the whole deal will lose a lot of its charm and terror.
>>7826562
The Turing types (against Penrose) are the majority in AI research, however modest the day-to-day aims of the engineering functionaries are.
Bostrom's book has a nice overview of the history of AI development, including false starts and historical ambitions. It's also got a good overview of the various types of AI historically or currently attempted.
Ironically people with less technical knowledge of AI often have more of an idea what "AI" is/entails than technical specialists do, in the same way that a physicist can't comprehend the idea of "before the Big Bang" because he's conditioned to think of "time" based on one limited definition, but some un-sciencey Heideggerian who has read Heidegger's critiques of metaphysics can see remedial problems in the scientist's categories of thinking. AI people do the same shit. Totally unreflective.
my plans feel so lame in comparison. Gonna teach high school english or english overseas for 5 or 6 years then go back and work on my masters and hopefully teach college english.
>>7826588
That isn't lame at all anon. I came so close to going to school to be a high school teacher, sometimes I wish I did.
>>7826554
econ majors are shit at math from my experience. we had a grad student in one of my classes and that nigga couldn't keep up to save his life.
>>7826581
>Ironically people with less technical knowledge of AI often have more of an idea what "AI" is/entails than technical specialists do,
>retards unironically believe this
>>7826627
This is exactly why, too. Disciplinary loyalty. Note that no actual ideas are being exchanged here, just that you have authority because you're speaking for the STEMOSPHERE.
Just according to keikaku, since I was trying to show how badly STEM needs to be epistemically porous. Brb fingering you're mum
>>7826618
Well idk family. I had up to calculus 3 in high school and so far haven't made below an A in any math related course. I should probably be a math major but it didn't feel as relaxed oreasy[\spoiler] as economics
>>7826639
wew lad you sure keikakkued him good
dori dori dori
>>7826639
You sure showed him. Keep saying it again but in different words and less specific please. Thank you.
you guys can't even keep the most simple discussion interesting or even civil. i just wanted to talk about dank paper ideas for engrish/lit majors but i guess you can keep literally shitting in your own mouths
>>7825807
What major are you? English?
If you can try to bring in philosophy so your paper is more than just being a "quaint piece". What Dreyfus did in the 80's would be enough to grab you.
>>7826767
It's comparative lit or something like that. In sweden it's called just literature but it's basically the whole field. So i guess less specialized.
I was hoping to do some philosophy of mind or philosophy of being in relation to consciousness and fictional/artificial varieties. But still going theough sources to see if i can find stuff that would work. I had looked into dreyfus, seems good. It's still just a bachelor's that's just for my own amusement and interest so i can make pretty mich anything of it. The gubmint actually pays me to do it.
>>7826644
>>7826660
>>7826698
>tfw technoplebs can't even formulate a response
>tfw i didn't even get to how AI is actually ahrimanic consciousness
NEXT TIME SEND ME YOUR FINEST WARRIOR
>>7827221
I agree with u, m8
>>7827221
lol
I'm halfway to my lowly bs and ba so I won't bother posting what I'm working on
>>7827221
>>7825807
1st yr phd student studying da sick ai's and machine intelligene
it's gon be dop brudads
tfw i'm bot
>>7826797
desu it sounds like you're about to write a pointless contentless paper and you've got no appreciation for the complexities within the field
learn some fucking computer science, coding, neurology, machine learning, etc etc etc. before trying to create shit regarding a very complex field just because "its so totally fascinating"
I bet you don't even know what a turing machine is without googling
>>7827347
I'm not writing a paper on ai. I'm writing a paper on beckett with theories concerning the nature of consciousness as basis for the analysis
Undergraduate in History, towards end of second year. I'm considering going into academia and doing a Master's and PHD but i'm not sure yet.
>>7825890
>check out Bostrom's Superintelligence
>serious, serious moral, ontological, and epistemological issues that are COMPLETELY outside the blinders of AI researchers
>the single greatest moral travesty in human history will be the first time someone switches on a full-brain simulation
>>7828017
>moral travesty
more like the permanent end of human civilization
>>7828020
Desu, senpai, unironically reading Bostrom is a moral travesty in itself.
>>7828017
>you will live to hear the head of some research group of a massive world wide tech company say "i am become life, destroyer of worlds" as he activates the first quantum neural superhuman brainmachine
>>7828044
>as he activates the first quantum neural superhuman brainmachine
yeah nah that won't happen
>>7828044
>>7825807
First year.
Currently writing a late essay on the differences between Viking colonies in inhabited areas versus colonies in uninhabited areas. I'm only losing a mark if it gets in before monday so I'm not too stressed.
Main subjects are Celtic and Saxon studies and Religious studies.
Thinking I'll drop out after second year, go home and get a job.
I feel like I'm wasting my time here.
maybe I'll do a portfolio course.
Yeah the femen are kind of irritating, more so their omnipresence rather than any of their activity, luckily their not so agitative here.
>>7825807
>who here in academia? any level.
29yo, phyiscist, finishing my PhD in computational plasma chemistry.
but I'm jumping of the academic track proper on purpose now by not doing a post-doc. Nonetheless, it seems like I'm going to work alongside post-docs after all, in a research institute.
>what you researching? writing about? being angry about?
I'm not an angry person.
I wanna do more math and more with modern programming languages now. I also "write about" statistical physics, I wanna connect those topics.
axiomsofchoice.org
>>7825890
>Currently in a similar situation of pounding out my MA thesis in like two months. It's on the failure of theoreticians to account for or influence epistemological shifts in how the field deals with a certain subject, and how the vast majority of scholars actually have no rigorous theoretical basis or methodology, but kind of a lazy pastiche of the leftover shrapnel from more conscientious theoretical debates in the past.
That sounds intriguing, I'd like to read more about it.
But I hope it's not a wrapper and you only actually want to talk about that AI thing.
In my humble opinion, one should not care too much about things that would only apply after one is dead, or even if it only applies when one is 80. It doesn't matter and it's all too vague.
(The Wiki article on the book doesn't look technically informed enough for me. Again, I wanna be concerned with things in the now.)
>>7826581
>Ironically people with less technical knowledge of AI often have more of an idea what "AI" is/entails than technical specialists do, in the same way that a physicist can't comprehend the idea of "before the Big Bang" because he's conditioned to think of "time" based on one limited definition, but some un-sciencey Heideggerian who has read Heidegger's critiques of metaphysics can see remedial problems in the scientist's categories of thinking. AI people do the same shit. Totally unreflective.
I think you use the wrong words to express yourself.
I also read Wittgenstein (or even Camus) and try to understand the Heidegger of this world.
The fact that you can come up with concepts that aren't withing the real of the natural scientists doesn't invalidate the notion that "before the big bang" is meaningless. Yes, they (I) internalized some notion of time and that's how those words are used. You'll need new words if you want to express something along those lines and talk with uninitiated scientist. Why in the world do you blame scientists for having developed a fixed and more accurate semantics for their language, for their purposes?
>>7828191
>You'll need new words if you want to express something along those lines and talk with uninitiated scientist.
The words exist, it's that scientists and especially engineers are too culturally limited and unindividuated to understand them in nuanced ways. Most workaday scientists have unknowingly absorbed a mishmash of epistemological, metaphysical, and ethical positions, all interrelated, but think that they have no explicit positions whatsoever. The most unreflective vulgar positivist thinks he has infinite epistemic flexibility because he's "open to proofz, just proof it to me m8." And they all speak with the authority of scientism, not because it has trained them rigorously or anything like that, but just because they speak on its behalf.
The prewar/fin-de-siecle darwinian position thought it was "scientific" and perfectly "open" too, when it was churning out views of history that involved systematic genocide. So did 19th century positivism that seems cartoonish to us today. So does the pharmaceutical industry, when a trained chimp with an IQ of 104 doles out a bucket of pills because she was told that the Holy DSM must be obeyed. So do psychoanalysts when they think hypnotically suggesting you had a finger up your ass when you were five is a pure science. So did Foucault's Nurse Ratched-esque psychological profession.
It's not about explaining metaphysics to a scientist. It's about them rejecting the idea of metaphysics, then substituting their own, broken-down unconscious metaphysical model and claiming it isn't metaphysics at all, so there can be no further discussion.
Scientism is a closed system of thought, and it operates in the usual way, by making the peons at the bottom (e.g., engineering undergrads) think they will gain prestige by association if they act like zealots.
>>7828112
Why not just drop out now if you already plan to?
>>7828223
Next year's courses seem interesting.
I don't plan to, just seriously considering it.
>>7826493
I go to one of the highest-rated and most notoriously difficult stem schools on the planet. You are wrong. The most "well-rounded" engineers, 90% of the time, still hate humanities, with the occassional exception of those autistically talented in music.
These are people who mold their entire personality around things reddit considers cool. I've spoken with them and heard them unironically claim that professional league of legends players are smarter than any author who has ever lived.
>>7828215
Aha, an angry rant... well I don't disagree with you on that scientists reject a lot of thoughts that can be helpful and interesting.
I literally just said that it's not a bad thing that they gave a precise meaning to some vague notions/words - and if you want to go back and use the word in a vague way again (to be able to express non-scientific realism'ish philosophical thoughts), then introduce new words. Maybe you think it's unfair that those guys taken the expression "time", view it as some variable in some theory and disregard your ideas as soon as you use "time" differently, but I think it's good that this happened, even if I'm not the kind of person that simply rejects other philosophy.
>>7825921
Holy shit liblords are narcissistic as hell
Youd think for people who claimed to study the nature of knowledge they would actually know something
>>7828251
In case someone dares commenting about the gif instead of responding to me, here's references
https://youtu.be/aQiWF4E8flQ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorting_algorithm#Comparison_of_algorithms
>>7828251
I'm not angry, I just like talking about this kind of thing and I keep going on /lit/ when I'm caffeinated. Sorry OP.
>if you want to go back and use the word in a vague way again (to be able to express non-scientific realism'ish philosophical thoughts), then introduce new words.
I do want to clarify though, since I think there's a miscommunication here, I was just using the "time" thing as an example of how someone like Hawking (honestly, just first thing that came to mind since he's a retard) can make a really strong ontological statement while thinking he's not speaking philosophically at all.
Same with AI people. We're in this really weird disciplinary situation where the people who are deciding whether the world needs killer gigantic swarms of killer bees are bee specialists who have spent decades in bee laboratories falling madly in love with bees and the idea of making more bees. I'm sure they have ideas about bees, but I'd like for people who are a little less bee-crazy to maybe enter the discussion, even if they don't have as much specialist knowledge of bee anatomy.
>>7828269
I don't think your bees are that scary. 9 out of 10 ideas fail, and people should peruse their ideas. The status quo is boring. Sorry if that's too much of a science-pleb perspective to you, I don't -really- care about a hypothetical danger of end of the world in 2100.
>>7828215
good reflection, thx
Also, you can see, how the pure success of the scientific pursuit creates firm confidence.
The problem is very much aggravated by unripe philosophers smirking at materialism, circlejerking among thir own, never able to clearly point out its weaknesses to an engineer, say.
>>7826493
my god, when they show up in our classes as electives it is always so much cringe. They present so many non-sequiturs in a very strange combination of smugness and as if they just out thought Adorno and have finally slayed postmodernism.
there is so much contact embarrassment
>>7828274
>>7828274
It's an interesting personal conviction, but it's not an ethical or political stance so I have no problem with it.
Also
>>7827278
>>7828276
thanks bros
>The problem is very much aggravated by unripe philosophers smirking at materialism, circlejerking among thir own, never able to clearly point out its weaknesses to an engineer, say.
Yeah, and I guess I'm guilty of that here.
That is the real funny thing. The humanities response to the blinders scientism.. is to put on their own blinders and start their own circlejerk. Great job.
>>7827989
But beckett's unnameable is literally a dick attached to one of the other characters in the trilogy. .. artificial consciousness in beckett is cyclic humanity which arises from the sex drive. All the writing on the unnameable is shit.
>>7828269
>I'd like for people who are a little less bee-crazy to maybe enter the discussion
No. If anything, the scientists themselves should undergo much more rigorous ethical training during their schooling (and there is a push for this). Bringing non-experts in to tell experts how to do their jobs, however, is always terrible.
I understand your point but 1) the actual bee people will have as little respect for the others as /lit/ has for john green fanboys and 2) the others will know so little about bees that they will misunderstand any of the actual issues and give shitty advice. It would be a huge pain in the ass at best, and a fucking catastrophe waiting to happen at worst, depending on the field.
>>7828269
You'll find that so many people disagree with you because having studied bees just a little they understand that bees in fact are very beneficial in agriculture and quite gentle creatures. They also want to correct you in thinking they want to create a killer gigantic swarm when in fact they just want to create a swarm that is resistant to a specific pest control and can pollinate faster.
There is a lot of moral implications to AI/ML which need to be addressed. A recent example that comes to mind is the decision making in self-driving cars. But the danger of creating the a superintelligence is just uneducated fantastical drivel. Just like going on about the dangers of creating universe consuming bee astronauts.
>>7828280
"So, for example... take this table-"
Oh my god, no, do not take the table as an example!
Why this still happens?
>>7828292
Man i'm so bored with literary studies involving sex and sex drive as the number one motivation for any human endeavour ever attempted. Fuck, look outside your (and your qt professors) genitals for once.
>>7825900
>that is literally the opposite of what we need
>people like you are why STEMlords get to make fun of humanities retard
>this is such a mind boggling retarded perspective that i can't help but feel that the STEMlords are right when they say humanities academia is a joke, speaking as someone in humanities academia
so just to clarify, your position is rather than encouraging discussion, it's better to enforce silence. right?
>>7828313
one time i smoked salvia and became the table in front of me
it was very uncomfortable to have splintered woodgrain thoughts
Undergrad. doing some preliminary research for my thesis next fall. Caught between a few topics. On the one hand, I'd like to do something trendy and postcolonial that could get picked up by a journal. On the other hand I'm really interested in reactionary use of post-structural thought, occultism in structuralism and post-, and Marxist structuralism generally. none of these latter seem to be considered important by anyone though. it's all biopolitics this, foucauldian power studies that, postcolonial this that and the other, ecological studies, bla bla. all neo-lefty pap that just seems really circular.
>>7828311
Who the hell designed that pic about ethical cars?
I'm not in any field of academia,
And only have a basic knowledge of AI or computing in general...
But it would seem to me that -
1 or 2 people crossing = swerve around them while maintaining course on the road
Several people crossing = default action = EMERGENCY BRAKE and cut off/limit power output simultaneously
That took me less time to configure in my head than it would have taken to make that image.
Why does -
Person(s) crossing road = swerve wildly off road onto pavement/into wall?
'stay on road' should be a fundamental parameter, no?
This entire thread is why I avoided all prescribed academia outside of vocational qualifications.
Because every field of academia becomes a mental masturbation circlejerk.
>>7828518
I'm p sure a couple of people from the nouvelle droit are heavily drawing from poststructuralist philosophies
>>7829273
I'm no expert, but I do believe that graph represents a an extreme situation in which breaking in time would be unfeasible, do to high speed or road conditions such as ice and whatnot.
>>7830302
Braking is always an option and always feasible.
It would at least slow down the car considerably,
Improving chances of survival for the person possibly hit.
Compared to merely driving into a crowd, swerving to hit somebody else, or driving to hit a wall,
It's preferable.
Also, improve crumple zones at front of car.
The rest who are killed anyway?
Call it computer-aided natural selection.
>>7828518
its a shame because Foucault is really quite interesting and is worth writing about in terms that aren't endless postcolonial wank.
>>7828518
>occultism in Marxist structuralism
Please don't be another person who writes about Marx without having read all three volumes of Capital.
>>7825807
Finishing up my MA thesis in Russian lit. Angry about how little I'm learning in my classes compared to if I had more time to read on my own.
>>7829849
that's what I mean. it's a fascinating development id like to explore, but it's very difficult in my environment to explore right wing things with assuming a destructively critical attitude lest you expose yourself as a fascist and tank your career
>>7831243
without* assuming
>>7825811
>in special forces
Similar to this (>>7828191) anon. I'm in the middle of my PhD, researching on silicon nanostructures. I'm mostly angry about working for the past two years in a private company, which seemed to suck my soul on a daily basis. On the other hand, I would not have decided that I liked academic research better if I didn't experience those two years. Now I'm just mostly angry that I can't indulge all of my interests (e.g. playing piano, reading literature, practicing drawing, etc) due to lack of time.
>>7829273
>>7830600
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/542626/why-self-driving-cars-must-be-programmed-to-kill/
Braking is always an option but it's not always effective and relevant. It's quite possible to end up in situations where the car can't brake in time to prevent hitting someone at lethal speed and any effusive maneuvers will put the driver at a high risk of death. I'm sure you're aware of that unless you're from a country without cars.
>>7831243
Try using Marx, D&G, Kant as material for fleshing out right ideas without it being apparent. The trick is identifying the root of the argument as far upstream as possible, in metaphysics, and making your argument there. Let the implications remain non-obvious except for those clued in to the right signs. Do research "backwards" i.e. against an idea, and use that as your basis to develop it at length (and then "refute" it with some postcolonial voodoo).
I'm not in academia but I collaborate with many who are. Those are their insights.
>>7825890
>The world needs a lot more fucking intellectual contributions on AI from non-technical outsiders
haha no it fucking doesn't
>>7826507
your post would've been accurate in 2011 or so
>>7831537
No.
It’s always effective and relevant.
The odds of survival go from 20% at 40mph
To around 80% at 30mph.
A 25% reduction in speed is feasible if the AI reflexes are faster than human reflexes,
And power is cut from the engine while brakes are activated.
Anybody who is too close is too close anyway.
Do you mean to say if I hit someone in my car and the judge asks why I didn't brake until after I hit them, I can just say -
'Well, your honour, I think braking would have been neither, A, effective, or B, relevant. Thanks, goodbye..'
I'm sure you're aware that doesn't scan,
Unless you're from a country without law courts.
In this country, an 'emergency stop' is a requirement for driving test exams,
And is the default option for any unexpected obstruction that cannot be swerved around while maintaining course...
>>7831243
Only at upper echelons. I've used Gehlen, Schmitt, Heidegger etc. in papers handed in to Marxists and they didn't care at all.
You have to be careful if you're a hardcore Heidegger scholar. But Carl "GAS 'EM ALL ADOLF" Schmitt for example was only edgy to use in the 80s, when a huge wave of English translations came out for his work. Now every lame-ass postcolonial moron is reading him to spice up their arguments by showing how they went out and tamed a Nazi lion in service to leftism.
Seriously, you only get second looks if you're a professor of Heideggerian philosophy and you don't do a bare minimum to qualify it somehow ("I'm taking it back to Husserl" or something).
>>7831582
The fact that you think discussions of "AI" only apply to machine learning is why I drove an $80,000 BMW to get here and you drove a Hyundai.
>>7826639
Could you go into a bit more depth about why the humanities can tell people in STEM about the issues in AI they haven't considered?
You have to admit it sounds a bit...I don't know...pretentious? I'm not saying you are wrong, but it does come across a bit like '''yo man you STEM autists need to loosen up and take some acid and learn how to LIVE from some real humans yo'''' but i'm sure you already know this.
For starters: why do you feel that STEM needs to be 'epistemically porus' - haven't they been vastly more successful than any other field? Why would they want to adopt or try to spend time on any epistemically when 1) they're current one, whatever it is, gets results 2) nobody in the humanities can say they have truly got much beyond aristotle without being partisan. what's the point in opening up when the issues they are meant to open themselves up too haven't even been improved on in 4000 years, let alone resolved?
>>7832387
I'm not OP, but you STEMfags are insufferable.
>>7832423
Well, fine - but at least they are doing something rather than nothing at all. Well, worse than nothing - tax dollars that could at least go back into the pocket of working men get shifted towards the social capital accumulation of smart PhD candidates who's work isn't even read by anyone beyond 5 people in their specialist circle(jerk)
OPs ideas basically seem to be against scientists using a sort of everyday metaphysics, despite it's proven success without involving it....but what's even the point in getting scientists to engage in questions like that, when the people who are actually interested in them can't resolve or make progress on them?
The whole STEMfags are insufferable seems mainly confined to 4chan. On the whole the nicest people i've met seem to have been STEM people - I imagine this is because it doesn't attract narcissists (there's ultimately no connection between what you discover and yourself), and partly that it's far easier to see what works and what doesn't - so everyone knows exactly what their place is, and waht their limits are...rather than being able to bullshit their way out of everything so arguments are never resolved (if they are at all resolvable)
>>7832685
Hahahaha, you know I actually thought ''I don't think the guy I am responding too is OP'' in the middle of typing it all out...but I too am a caffeine driven shitposter so it's sort of hard to stop mid-flow.
>>7832695
>>7832649
>>7832387
well if you're actually sincere you should look into philosophy of science just to get a sample of the kinds of critiques that are out there, especially if you're going to be working in science. a lot of the words you're using ("progress," "results" etc.) are the first things to go when you start historicizing the common-sensical ideology of institutional science/technology in the west. even if you end up feeling the same way in the end, that technological progress is inevitable or necessary despite its dangers or something like that, you will be more nuanced in them by looking at some of the critiques that have been made.
a STEM-friendly, non-threatening example is bachelard's epistemic obstacle:
>Bachelard demonstrated how the progress of science could be blocked by certain types of mental patterns, creating the concept of obstacle épistémologique ("epistemological obstacle"). One task of epistemology is to make clear the mental patterns at use in science, in order to help scientists overcome the obstacles to knowledge.
>>7825807
what happened to Dawkins?
>>7826581
>Penrose opposed to Turing when he's developed him
>Turing's dream AI not being so humanistic that it's essentially the same as birth
>physicist doesn't understand before the Big Bang when most of them are all "but dark matter man"
>implying the present-to-hand is more human than the ready-to-hand or unready-to-hand
fucking hell, how can you be more ignorant than an AC Clarke fan in science and philosophy? 10/10 if trolling. my god look at your life/0 if serious
there's no progress in artificial consciousness u know nothing turd, ai is the information age philosopher's stone, it ain't gonna happen brah and ur descendants will just look at u like a jackass for researching it
>>7834320
can forgive not understanding the penrose/turing opposition, but can't forgive not knowing at least what turing is in reference to AI in this context
verdict: not worth a reply, actual child brain detected
>>7834407
heh, i'll assume you're trolling not genuine. trying to defend you shitting your pants with the babby level troll of basic arrogance is disappointing after that post which couldn't become more wrong if you substituted all the proper nouns with Harry Potter characters. i expect more of your bait after the previous tasty morsels of abject not-even-wrongness
>>7834439
if they made a machine to perfectly simulate you, it still wouldn't be considered machine "intelligence"
>>7834475
getting closer to funny troll, but you've also shifted me back to the suspicion you're hoping that the people who do understand this shit will hang out with you and acting like a girl when they don't because you haven't done the reading and/or are a functional retard.
>>7832104
Well I guess those people designing the cars are just big old dummies, it just never occurred to them to just brake.
It's irrelevant because they will brake either way. The issue is wether the car should also try to avoid the people. It's a simple scenario that has to be programmed in even if it only happens so very rarely.
>>7834984
Well it's so simple, it garnered almost 400 comments accusing the site of linkbait,
And those tasked with this 'problem' as overthinking it.
The general consensus of the comments (yes, I read them all because I'm that anal) was -
1) the computer is supposedly replacing a human
2) what do we tell humans to do in this scenario? In every driving lesson or test, they do not run through multiple danger scenarios
3) we tell them to brake if you cannot swerve while maintaining course and controlling the vehicle
4) tell the computers to do that then
5) a computer would be faster to react, not drunk or high, enhanced vision and optional multiple cameras and sensors (humans being limited to one pair of eyes) would not get distracted, look away or talk, check cellphone, wear glasses, etc etc
6) If it has time to break and pull off a perfect 90 degree right turn, it can brake in the same amount of time
7) assuming death of driver or pedestrians as a binary O/I is retarded
8) computers fuck up enough as it is without complicated algorithms compounding the issue. Even if 0.0025ms is all it takes to compute and begin to turn, that time should be spent braking and deploying airbags
9) assuming a high speed scenario, a car would likely slide or drift into pedestrians anyway.
Have any of these guys actually played Gran Turismo, or seen Tokyo Drift?
(ok, I made the last one up)
Hey guys, had a college-related vocabulary question. Thought the /lit/ board and this thread in particular might be a good place to ask.
I'm looking for a word that describes a certain kind of college course. I think they call them "enrichment courses" these days, but there used to be another term. Entirely elective. No credit. No grading. Though still with an instructor and a more or less formal setting. It usually revolves around some kind of skill, and often physical education related. It could be things like "baking" or "kayaking" for example. They offer a lot of them at community colleges, but plenty at four year institutions too.
Anybody know the term?
>>7836166
"Kayak Fuckfest"
>>7836166
there's several answers here
http://blog.dictionary.com/college-slang/
I don't know if that's what you mean, but I've heard "cake course" more from those options than I've heard the others. I think though they come with some credits and usually the implication is that someone is taking a "cake course" to fill out credits.
>>7836373
No, it's not slang I'm looking for. An official though maybe antiquated word. You could find it in the course description in a college catalog.
>college past bachelors in non-technical fields
wew lad, good luck with your future
>>7836166
Underwater basket weaving.
>>7836431
>being this poor that you need "employable" degrees
lmaoing @ your ilfe
I'm doing my M.Sc on BDNF and TrkB densities in rats following differing regimes of MDMA and cocaine self-administration.
I sorta got interested in the field because I've always held a fascination with drugs. So I jumped at the opportunity to work with them hands on. I have a good potential at receiving a PhD scholarship due to already having published and expect to publish again at least once before the end of my M.Sc, but I think completing a PhD will pigeonhole me into academia or research which is not something I'm convinced I want to do.
>>7836452
Let me guess, your wealth is heavily concentrated in either overvalued real estate, numbers on a computer somewhere or in a bank.
lol, again good luck.
>>7836579
all i hear is
>i'm unbearably poor oh god kill me please
>>7836624
But anon what happens when you can't withdraw money from your bank? Or when your bank takes your money to bail themselves out? What happens when people realize that the stock market is very overvalued due to QE being pumped to allow companies to buyback their stocks?
>>7825807
I'm doing an Master in Law and working as a research assistant on a project at the university - doing empirical legal research. Good times.
>>7836674
>Or when your bank takes your money to bail themselves out?
>implying i don't own the bank
>What happens when people realize that the stock market is very overvalued due to QE being pumped to allow companies to buyback their stocks?
you don't know how the economy works do you :) when shit hits the fan (and i'm sure it will) poorfags ilke you get screwed senpai. not me, not my family, no my friends, and not my friends' families. you, the middle and lower middle class, will be getting bent over backwards while i laugh at you with my mansion and "useless" degree. have fun with that STEM major senpai, i'm sure you won't starve on the streets at the very least :)
Do english departments need orthodox/staunch Marxist literary analysis anymore? Can there be a revival where each dept. needs to hire at least one?
I at least feel retarded undergrads would get a kick out of a marxist analysis of twilight or w/e they read
>>7825807
I'm not in academia, but my friend is, and his boss just posted a fucking paper about how glaciers affect gender conventions.
I'm not even kidding. He uses the phrase "Human-ice interactions."
http://www.scribd.com/doc/302967745/Glaciers-gender-and-science-A-feminist-glaciology-framework-for-global-environmental-change-research
>>7825890
I understand some of these words
>>7837824
samefag
>>7836674
none of that will ever happen you delusional twit
>>7837792
>SAGE
they publish over 800 journals and only a fraction of them are peer-reviewed. you can get some pretty whack shit out there. check out /Body & Society/, /Theory, Culture & Society/, and /Theory & Psychology/. They all publish phenomenally bizarre material.
>>7837792
>SAGE
>University of Oregon
lol
I'm wrapping up a Master's in genetics.
>>7836166
at my school they'd be called seminars or something
