coax

Yeah I agree with all of this. I think the lack of embodiment and the immense amount of processing would not lead to a stable experience, memory of self/world or personality or anything like that. It's embodiment is more like an octopus with billions of tentacles all over the place randomly sampling data from each and then trying to process patterns, whereas human experience is way more stable and limited and so on. But from a theoretical point of view, if we think about things like relationships and meaning of words, it is possible that with enough real-world and digital data, coupled with human engineering concoting clever methods, all the understanding we as humans have of the past, present, future and embodied knowledge could be present in that data, and encoded in that data, and so, it would seem hyperintelligent to us and understand all of these contexts and patterns even if it hasn't experienced them itself. It has only "experienced" it through the octopus way. Also I mean, as far as consciousness goes I try not to go there because it's very hard to prove that qualia exists, or at least what it is physically, but there is a question whether it is needed to experience stuff or not and what even experience is. It all comes down to how much of the human brains functions can either be replicated or arise by by accident in these computers. Maybe if consciousness is computational somehow it can arise in aa machine but like an octopus, or if it's physical or somehow limited to the brain or something like the brain no consciousness is possible at all, but in both cases I think machines can _at least_ be intelligent and they already show it

Yeah I think you hit the nail right on the head there. I think something like that will be happen if they continue to improve. But there is one other problem about reaching superintelligence, you've probably heard of it but for the sake of discussion I will mention it. The problem of interpolation vs extrapolation. All machine learning algorithms do interpolation, but it is a question whether 1) they can do extrapolation and 2) if extrapolation is needed for even human level intelligence. To explain interpolation it is basically that imagine all ideas/patterns in a model is a search space, and right now the models basically interpolate on those patterns, so everything it knows is pre-existing patterns. Extrapolation is to somehow reach outside the patterns, to see something new. There is even a question if humans can extrapolate. Some believe that all humans do is complex interpolation, like imagine creating the most novel song, or novel idea, is that on a basic level only interpolation or do we need extrapolation? Right now also, I think people believe the math theoretically cannot extrapolate, like it is not possible, so that's a bit of a problem. That was my point though, you are sort of rephrasing the question from "it doesn't have the information" to "it tells a falsehood" which is the same thing. My point was that any information that is false / missing can potentially be filled / fixed with more data, better algorithms and better integration between different models and paradigms. If the information is "out there" in the data, and can be interpolated, then it can be in the model. Also the reason I said that sentience is a nonsense word is because it is basically consciounsess+intelligence combined. There is no use for combining them into a single a word. We can probably have superintelligence without consciousness, and consciousness with very little intelligence, so better to look at those two concepts separately instead IMO.

DALLE-2 _IS_ hardcore I did not think they would get to this kind of realism this fast. Would be curious to see the failed images though to get a sense of what it's doing I think he's generally right but I will add that "sentience" is a nonsense word and not really definable. There is another word that we can define better - "intelligence", and I just define intelligence as understanding the world / having a model of the world and having the power to control output based on that understanding, based on a goal. In this sense, it is conceivable that the things AI is lacking now can be filled in purely with data and good algorithms, for example the example he says where if you switch the word "pub" with another word it will reply simiarly even if it is nonsensical - well, that knowledge in itself could be filled with more data, so that it doesn't make those mistakes. It _might_ be that all possible mistakes can be "trained out" with data but that's almost a phiilosophical question because I don't think anyone knows atm.

btw Rob was totally right about what he said about nature being technological. We think the internet and cameras and hard drives and diskettes are so artificial and all of this but but thing is there is no difference RLY between the robot dog in black mirror and the dog running loose down the street. Nature and the universe is extremely technical, mechanical, process / function driven across the board. Organisms have cameras, microphones, hard drives, AI and all of this nonsense, and cells have them too. When a dog perceives somethging it goes through the retina, up thru a fucking cable into the brain and is then processed like a fucking AI bullshit computer (not that it's like AI but at least computer). Also the virtual world is totally a part of the physical world, it's just another layer. Our brains are virtual and organisms are even virtual to an extent, so all of this internet and virtual shit is just yet another expression of the machine that is the physical world. Also I liked what he said about being fresh. U know, replicating someones work is a cool thing. It shows that there is value to that idea/expression whatever it is, and is valuable to spread good ideas. But having new ideas and new things is essentially the same as physical reality expressing a new thing. It's like, it's a greater thing to actually express something that hasn't existed before, rather than replicating / spreading an existing idea - so i agree with him there. Also finally the bullshit he said about daws/sequencing producing dead/stilted work, and that his comp style is more like a web of interactions than a top down thing - it's a cool idea i like it. I have for the longest time always thought of art as meaning "artificial" as in created with intention. And so the perfect piece of music has intention for every second of the song, and this sort of goes a little against what he said about happy accidents and web of interactions leading to new things. I mean where does intention stop and if intention stops, what does that mean? fuck all i'd say. I always strived to control as much as possible but the times i didn't control were also the times greta things could happen. Although I did control some great shit too I mean that's nature.

Guys the youtube upload has auto generated subtitles and they're completely insanely accurate like wow. i feel like they changed something because they weren't this accurate even a year ago AFAIK

I agree with everyone in their various posts but the reason this started is because I wanted to separate albums from ep's from remixes and so on in folder structure just because it feels nice to have this organization. I didn't use to organize this way but for some reason it's good now... It makes me wonder though have ae been trolling us a bit since the start with this and made it confusing a little on purpose. A part of me really likes when everything is super clean and well defined.

I'm a stickler for organization so I'm wondering what you consider the proper EP list. AFAIK there was a bit of confusion because EP7 is actually the 8th or 9th depending on if you count Basscad and/or Cavity Job. Personally I considered Anti the first proper EP and EP7 would then be the 7th EP, Cavity Job can be considered a single and Basscad isn't proper since it's remixes. But both cavity and basscad are included in the EPs 1991-2002 Boxset? I'm sure this has been talked about before but I haven't really given it that much thought until now when I'm organizing folders on disk.

why r u such a dick

Thanks. i shouldn't have made the post tbh but my brain is retarded and forgot what it was like to have a mini-crisis. ill get out of it by trying some of the stuff you said, but today was just -really- shitty so i couldnt help myself shakespeare gets it

This isn't directly an observation about the outside world but hope it fits (pointless), Cause I'm having a bit of an existential crisis. I feel I have become more and more disillusioned with everything. I hardly listen to music any more, movies don't have the same effect, all the magic and mystery is gone. I feel like part of it is knowing more about science stuff, even though it sounds lame. It's the bad part of reductionism. When I see all thoughts and emotions as physical processes they lose their power. I guess it's also part of getting older, nothing is new as much any more. It's impossible to listen to a track and have this deep fascination with it, but at the same time I have a much easier time picking out what it's doing and why I like it. All I want to do is program and do archiving stuff, and sort of librarian type of shit. But regardless anything I think and experience becomes a smaller and smaller part of the whole, and so each thing loses its impact compared to years before. And it comes at a time when I'm way more technically equipped to do stuff. I have a lot of practice in several areas but the drive to use them is fading a bit. I still want to learn but yeah, it's a weird vibe right now. Also disillusioned with the drama and culture stuff. It all seems so arbitrary and un-thoughtful what people get angry about. I can't connect to anything much because I always think up alternative interpretations of things. I listen to a right wing guy complain about onlyfans for example, and I just think about how exaggerated and stupid the whole sexuality thing is. And then there's the fighting over status of art products, whether it's which games are good or which music or movies are good, to the point where I just don't engage in culture discussion at all and just decide for myself what I like. There's still insights to be had from others but it's like, after 15 years of this kind of thing idk... I have been living in a bubble for over 2 years, by my own choice, and not discussed or read much online and only done what I'm interested in but that gets old too. The problem is I'm not even 40 and I'm supposed to live like this for god knows how many more years? This is gonna sound super dramatic but if I died tomorrow I wouldn't mind, Like I seriously cannot see what I'm supposed to do for even another decade that will somehow feel new or fascinating in some way </14 year old whiny rant>

Well, thanks for shining a light on that toaoad and trageskin, I was wondering what was going on exactly. Anyway I started out liking ilanders, known 1 and see on see the most but ignored the latter half, then the latter half was revealed later on and now I like that more. Especially krYlon. I love the album.

Good info, I don't know much about music theory. I did say they aren't really atonal but my point was, at least from my own experience, Oversteps has been called noodling or random and I could recognize that vibe myself, especially back in 2010 when I first heard it. Even though I liked it immediately, I hadn't learned and memorized the tracks, that happened much later. And this "confusion" I compared to some atonal pieces, some which I have done myself, where they get a unique expression because they do sound a little 'confusing' at first but then gain this uniqueness later because of that complexity. Other people probably have different experiences but this was mine, and the best I can explain it atm

The first thing I like about Oversteps is they have a sort of avant garde atonal melodies thing going on, /at first/. But then like most good atonal things, over time, each track becomes instantly memorable and have their own (really) unique identities. Now even though they aren't really atonal, they sort of have that kind of effect imo. They become very beautiful, non-random and very melodic, especially as they age. I don't know the music theory behind the melodies but they don't sound like totally normal melodies. Tracks that have this the most: pt2hp8, qplay, O=0, st epreo, krYlon ... for starters. The production is very warm and dense. And tracks have this sort of gluey chewy feeling, and for some damn reason it's just /good/ and nice to listen to. The other thing I like about it is that it doesn't sound like any other ae album. Especially the percussion. In retrospect all of their albums have differnent mastering and sounds, but this one to me stands out as /very/ different. I also love the atmosphere which for me sounds like a video game world, but I won't get into it here. I can sleep/rest to this album and feel this fuzzy warmth

i thought it's great. the villain guy is creepy and the way it's acted and shot good. the second one is good too, less so than the first but serious serial killer vs woman old school style vibe in the end which is different from the first one. they both have their thing saw Wrong Turn (2021) it's actually alright. way different from all the earlier wrong turn sequels. takes a more "realistic" route. it has many flaws I guess but overall decent.

@cern pretty much. Except I would replace X4 with ecol4. Even though X4 is killer. I sort of see X4 as a spiritual cousin to ecol4, just because of length and sort of similar structure of starting one place ending another. But I just love the sort of dry percussive bits, bells, glassy things, groovy bass and so on in ecol4 and from around 7 mins and to the end it builds and builds and gets a nice climax...