All fair points, and I don’t deny predictive text generation is at the core of what’s happening. I think it’s a fair statement that most people hear “predictive text” and think it’s like the suggested words in a text message, which it’s more than that.

I also don’t think Turing Tests are particularly useful long term because humans are so fallible. We too hallucinate all the time with our convictions based on false memories. Getting an AI to have what seems like an emotional response or show uncertainty or confusion in a Turing test is a great way to trick people.

The algorithm is already a black box as is the mechanics of our own intelligence. We have no idea where the ceiling is for this technology yet. This debate quickly goes into the ontological and epistemological discussion about what it means to be intelligent…if the AI predictive text generation is complex enough where you simply cannot tell a difference, then is there a meaningful difference? What if we are just insanely complex algorithms?

I also don’t trust that what the market sees in AI products is indicative of the current limits. AGI isn’t here yet, but LLMs are a scary big step in that direction.

Pragmatically, I will maintain that AI is a different form of intelligence because I think it shortcuts to better discussions around policy and how we want this tech in our lives. I would gladly welcome the news that tells me I’m wrong.

Talk to anyone who consumes Fox News daily and you’ll get incorrect predictive text generated quite confidently. You may also deny them their intelligence and lack of humanity with the fallacies they uphold.

I also think intelligence is a gradient—is an ant intelligent? What about a dog? Chimp? Who gets to draw the line?

It very may be a very complex predictive text generator that hallucinates but I’m concerned that it minimizes its capabilities for better or worse—Its ability to maintain context and has enough plasticity to reason and change its response points to something more, even if we’re at an early stage.

First, we don’t understand our own neurons enough to model them.

AI’s “neuron” or node is a math equation that takes a numeric input with a variable “weight” that affects the output. An actual neuron a cell with something like 6000 synaptic connections each and 600 trillion synapses total. How do you simulate that? I’d argue the magic of AI is how much more efficient it is comparatively with only 176 billion parameters in GPT4.

They’re two fundamentally different systems and so is the resulting knowledge. AI doesn’t need to learn like a baby, because the model is the brain. The magic of our neurons is their plasticity and our ability to freely move around in this world and be creative. AI is just a model of what it’s been fed, so how do you get new ideas? But it seems that with LLMs, the more data and parameters, the more emergent abilities. So we just need to scale it up and eventually we can raise the.

AI does pretty amazing and bizarre things today we don’t understand, and they are already using giant expensive server farms to do it. AI is super compute heavy and require a ton of energy to run. So, the cost is a rate limiting the scale of AI.

There are also issues related to how to get more data. Generative AI is already everywhere and what good s is it to train on its own shit? Also, how do you ethically or legally get that data? Does that data violate our right to privacy?

Finally, I think AI actually possess an intelligence with an ability to reason, like us. But it’s fundamentally a different form of intelligence.

Speaking as a designer, it’s important to separate the style/trend of a UI from its function. I think what you’re looking for is actually UX design.

As a discipline, User Experience uses evidence-based research to understand how and why users behave they do. This leads to specific design patterns and principles that underlie all the good UI design seen from the giants like Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc. It gives you the language to evaluate designs. This is the foundation of your UI and the rest is just style — fonts, colors, imagery and icons which is subjective and less important. I lost ambition to be a trendy UI designer, so every design looks the same, but usability will shines through. Clean, simple and accessible is timeless.

Study the articles from nngroup.com. They pretty much established the field of UX Design, with content talking about user behavior in the 1990s. https://lawsofux.com is a more attractive and consumable option, also heavily influenced by NN Group. Finally, accessible design is good design for all, not just those with disabilities. Understand the guidelines set by the W3C for accessibility, like minimum font sizes or contrast ratios for colors.

If others sing your praises, then you’re golden. To this day, I despise performance reviews and dread them every year and yet, every year they’re glowing reviews from my peers.

Being high-functioning often means you’re blind to your own contributions and more critical of your own work than others perceive. In time, I learned to accept the praise from others and blindly trust that things are ok even when every fiber of my being says I’m fucking up.

Sounds like you need validation more than anything. The points are bullshit if they don’t reflect the effort. Unfortunately, the corporate world is full of bullshit metrics to gauge productivity. I felt this at the bottom and nothing changed moving into “senior leadership”. It’s all bullshit and I encourage everyone to collect a paycheck and just go home.

I tell anyone entering the job market or is a young professional that absolutely no job is worth losing yourself over. Your skills change over time and will never leave you completely. I’m a competent designer, a reasonable developer but the most marketable skill that I didn’t actually develop until my late 20’s was soft skills—mostly developed by gently explaining to tech illiterate coworkers why what they wanted developed was impossible, impractical or just a bad idea.

I did this by treating every coworker as if they were the client. Be polite, professional and let them know that you want to solve their problems. It’s sounds stupid but people just put their guard down if you lead with, “I’m here to help you”. You can then have more honest conversation about all the bullshit keeping you from doing your job, provided it’s phrased as matter of fact and sprinkle in niceties.

The cruel irony is that this same disposition that started as a way to make me a more effective developer ended up pushing me into a position where I don’t get time to develop.

Over the 16 years since graduating, I learned that defining yourself by your career is often a trap. At least it doesn’t sound like you’re getting deep satisfaction from your work.

I burnt myself pretty bad going into the field thinking I was perusing a passion career and just kept getting kicked down for 5 years chasing a passion career until I found a work environment that paid decent and valued work/home life balance. In school I thought I’d never sell my soul, but now I’ve been working with the same people for a decade now and pretty happy about it, even with if the actual work is utterly boring.

Unless you’re a fortunate few that are truly passionate, driven, and lucky enough to land a career that fills your entire bucket, look for a job you can tolerate BUT with group of people that support you and your growth. In the end 2 years in is a drop in the bucket and you’ll see your career change directions over and over. You can always learn new skills or relearn them, so if this new job is something different to get you out of a slump, I say go for it. No one can answer for yourself but you.

Your body and mind is just a bag of chemical soup, undergoing a constant reaction. Your tangle of nerves and synapses feed a mess of neurons that are wired in a circuit that gives you that spark of consciousness. But none of this is a fixed system, and your body goes through constant change. As one neural pathway dies, another one is rewired and the circuitry is now different.

You can play the game of debating the Ship of Theseus, but who you “are” or “were” is just an illusion. Our memories are just the old circuits powering up, but even those change over time. Your memories are a false representation of the past because they only ever exist in the present and you’re at the mercy of your own perceptions.

You “are” until you are not. So do what feels good —Kiss your loved ones, hug a tree, and be kind to yourself and others while your bag of soup ain’t leaking.

I can also attest to hearing “eggs in a basket” and “toad in a hole” growing up. My son has just dubbed the dish “egg bread” and requested it almost daily. He also calls fried eggs “dip eggs” and boiled eggs “shape eggs.” He was probably 3 when he solidified these terms, but they have all stuck, 6 years later.

Meh, I opened Reddit just to lurk on the only subreddit I would post on. Recap for that community reminded me it was all one big circle jerk… but now with more advertisements.

I also hear people make the same claims against Alexa, but I usually start explaining what cookies are and how ad networks collects your data to more effectively target you. It doesn’t make fiscal sense to do mass audio surveillance when you already freely hand over your data.

Joe Pera Talks To You

This is what I thought as well. Creaming butter and sugar properly gives the cookie better structure and spread less.

The butter also needs to be the right temperature before baking—chilling dough is sometimes needed. Also regularly scrapping the sides of the bowl while mixing is important to have a nice homogeneous cookie without gobs of dry flour or butter.

Maybe kids have a leg up on the boomers that only had slide rules growing up, but I believe that tech literacy is much lower than people realize. Beyond the bare minimum of using email and browsing the web, most people generally just don’t aren’t using computers in a deep way, including kids that just grow up consuming content on tablets. Touch screens actively obscure the complexity of computers to make them more intuitive.

This research was published nearly 10 years ago but I it’s relevant today: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/computer-skill-levels/