Tuomas Pernu

YouTube video by Pink Floyd - Topic Two Suns in the Sunset

Finally, I understand the feelings of the few.

Ashes and diamonds, foe and friend.

We were all equal in the end.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFXf...

(No en nyt kovin vakavaksi kommennejani tarkoittanut.)

Pitäisikö meidän siis puhua termein: sopivat vs epäsopivat faktat?

Nyt, huom! Faktat eivät voi olla väärin. Noin-niinku käsitteellisesti. Sillä tällöin olisi kyse epätotuuksista. Ja vain tosiasiat voivat olla faktoja. QED

To be clear: she completely agreed - and stayed with us.

Who was there? You remember this, @willsharp55s.bsky.social?

Interesting stuff, @briandavidearp.bsky.social!

We discussed this when I was running a RG on addiction at @kingsphilosophy.bsky.social. We concluded that a person attending the group was addicted to her husband due to her unhealthy urge to go home and spend the evening with him rather than stay, continue the discussion and enjoy drinks with us.

What a wonderful way for universities to spend their money.

Also in the headlines that day: "U.S. Fuhrer Convicted". Let's hope we'll see that headline soon again.

Oh, I'm already buying this. I'm connecting this to the fundamental point that entities "on the same level" should be considered identical/interchangeable. Also, I wonder: would symmetry breaking be connected to some sort of inter-level interaction?

McCarthy had a personal beef with Wiener? But yea, "AI" is definitely more sexy than "cybernetics", or more punchy at least. Cybernetics has always seemed rather nebulous as a field. Perhaps one could say it's more encompassing, AI being just part of it (while cybernetics includes robotics etc.).

Niinpä. Jälleen esimerkki höpötutkimuksesta. Mitä hyötyä tästäkään on, jos tämä härpätin ei siirrä meitä välittömästi kesäaikaan!

Published, ironically, by Manchester UP.. Anyway, very interesting; should listen to this. (BTW, wasn't this the era when the number of population of London was at its highest?)

I find it weird - alarming - that this is not clear to everyone. Confusion is being intentionally propelled by the AI Snake Oil Salesmen, I suppose. A simple rule of thumb: LLMs are a proper subset of ML. We should speak consistently in terms of "ML" - and drop the term "AI" altogether.

Moreover: trials (especially serious cases) are dealing with more & more technical evidence. Consider: we will soon be overwhelmed by all sorts of fake/distorted data produced by AI. How do you think an average juror is going to handle this?

Wow, that sounds like a Southpark episode! But yea: I find it totally weird that (supposedly) civilized countries rely on this system. Moreover, I'd say that the *more serious the offense, the *less its trial should be affected by jurors - contrary to the proposal/discussion in the UK now.

I've found this brouhaha quite, hmm.. funny. There are many countries whose legal systems don't rely on jury trial - and where, I dare to say, the rights of the citizens are much better protected than in the UK (let alone in That Other jury trial country).

bsky.app/profile/theg...

I've found this brouhaha quite, hmm.. funny. There are many countries whose legal systems don't rely on jury trial - and where, I dare to say, the rights of the citizens are much better protected than in the UK (let alone in That Other jury trial country).

bsky.app/profile/theg...

Yes, arguably the most successful branding scheme in the history of academia. But I wonder if there was some (serious) debate on the term. (What's your point about Wiener? Was this project (intentionally) directed against cybernetics?)

Hah, yeah! BTW: are there some minutes of the Darthmouth Summer School? I wonder how much/what sort of discussion there was on the issue of adopting the term "AI".

Who is surprised? The real question is: when/how will the bubble burst?

I find it weird - alarming - that this is not clear to everyone. Confusion is being intentionally propelled by the AI Snake Oil Salesmen, I suppose. A simple rule of thumb: LLMs are a proper subset of ML. We should speak consistently in terms of "ML" - and drop the term "AI" altogether.

Sen. Mark Kelly demonstrates tremendous courage and tenacity as he speaks the truth about the illegitimate occupant in the Oval Office. 🔥🔥🔥
#TrumpisaNationalDisgrace

Hah, I don't know what those are. I'm here for the intellectual (academic) exchange, and I find this forum brilliant for that purpose. Maybe even better than Twitter, precisely because there's *less people, and the algorithms won't just throw stuff at you.

It's pretty good over here. (Maybe I missed "the good old days of Twitter", as I don't really get such feelings.)

We are lacking theoretical/philosophical discussion on the notion of data. Note: "data" is a plural of "datum" = "given". It is immediately clear, however, that nothing is purely "given". Something is such only in relation to conceptual schemes, theories or interests of enquiry.

This reads like a piece from MAD magazine.

The rise and fall of peer review Why the greatest scientific experiment in history failed, and why that's a great thing

These pieces by @mastroianni.bsky.social are great! But: although I was originally quite convinced by the idea of treating science as a mere strong-link issue (that we can completely ignore the negative links), I'm not that sure anymore. That's where my 20-30% acceptance rate suggestion stems from.

En saa jutun juonesta kiinni. Yhteys oikeistokonservatismin ja biologismin välillä on toki ilmeinen. Mutta uusliberalismin suuri tarina jää minulle hämäräksi. Vika lienee vastaanottimessa. Mutta totean: keskeisenä ongelma näen yhteiskuntatieteiden nykyparadigman kyvyttömyyden käsitellä biologiaa.