This seems like the most likely explanation.
The “memory palace” (AKA method of loci) inspiration is a plausible source for someone with a non-technical background, and there’s evidence that it’s closer to how the brain actually indexes memories natively.
(Although my understanding is that it bootstraps the hippocampus’s hard-wired ability to remember the layout of physical locations—I don’t know that an LLM would have a similar ability out of the box.)
A post intended to detract from the general context it’s part of.
Plus the privacy issue.
If those were ever commercially sold, the first accessory would be an opaque back to put behind it.
Are you talking about the transparent hand terminals? I think that effect was just to make it convenient to show the screen and the face of the person looking at it in the same frame—I don’t think there’s much demand for that in real life.
The second law of thermodynamics.
The exact mechanism would be interesting. Like, do leopards have a specific instinct that amounts to “when snow leopards are around, leave the blue sheep to them”? Or do all predators have a more general instinct along the lines of “don’t hunt a given prey if some other predator hunts them more effectively than we do”?
I think machines have replaced the role of the chorus in classical Greek tragedies. Everyone knows they’re not supposed to represent individual people—they’re just the personification of social expectations and unconscious norms.
When rich people dine, they bill it to the shareholders.
So did a pre-existing difference in prey allow their ranges to overlap without conflict, or did the overlap come first and the specialization on different prey follow as a result?
The Works of Vermin, by Hiron Ennes—just starting, but so far it’s reminiscent of Perdido Street Station.
On the Origin of the Human Mind, by Andrey Vyshedskiy—interested in how he relates his work on prefrontal synthesis to cognitive evolution.
Spring Summer, Asteroid, Bird by Henry Lien—compares eastern and western narrative traditions, but so far seems to take a rather superficial approach to both.
The owners of other robots.
Illogical fears require illogical solutions!
That’s what gives us “educated guesses”.
I would say that those are separate qualities: if someone had their memory erased, they could lose their knowledge and understanding without losing their intelligence or wisdom. (Intelligence isn’t unrelated, though—it’s what produces understanding from knowledge.)
When you understand something, you can deduce related information without having memorized it—so understanding increases your total capacity for knowledge. It’s like a knowledge compression algorithm.
If you couldn’t understand anything unless you were literally standing underneath it.
In order to count anything, you have to apply some kind of equivalence relation to the world to decide which things belong to the category of things you’re counting—so there’s some degree of subjectivity involved, and you’ll most likely divide the world up into things whose quantities are manageable. If you’re counting the number of times something happens, and the number gets too big to keep track of, you need to be more selective about what qualifies as a countable event. And it’s been established that the point at which numbers get unwieldy is around 42.
Top: the aurora australis.
It’s exactly analogous to an audio three-band graphic equalizer: if you were deaf and could only detect sound by looking at the equalizer display, you couldn’t distinguish between someone playing through the full scale and someone playing a single three-note chord while adjusting the volumes of the low, mid, and high notes.
Humans are to cats as cars are to humans: similar difference in weight and size, similar (if not greater) danger—but we walk around them because we’re used to them and we think we can predict them well enough. And because we’re often going to the same places.