Sunshine is what I use, too. You can set it up to adapt your monitor resolution to the deck upon connecting, and set it back to normal upon disconnect. Very handy.
You definitely can turn off steaminput with proton. Per-game, too.
Superpowered lying is already a thing, and all we needed was demographic data and context control.
Today, it is possible to get a population to believe almost anything. Show them the right argument, at the right time, in the right context, and they believe it. Facebook and google have scaled up exactly that into their main sources of revenue.
Same goes for attention hacking. AI generated content designed to hook viewers functions in entirely predictable, and fairly well understood ways. And the same goes for the algorithms which "recommend" additional content based on what someone is watching.
As for why doctors can't do things AIs are pulling off, I'd suggest that's because current systems are using indicators we don't know about, which they aren't sentient enough to explain. If they could, I have no doubt a human doctor, given enough time, could learn about, and detect, such indicators.
There is no evidence that what these models are doing, is "beyond our scale of thinking".
But again, I do think the machine will be faster.
Current models display "emergent capabilities", as in abilities we don't know about before the model is created and tested. But once it is created, we can and have figured out what it is doing and how.
Makes sense people watch em. Netflix isn't the one making them (sometimes funding them, yes) so there's an actual chance at future seasons and an actual ending with closure.
Logic is logic. There is no "advanced" logic that somehow allows you to decipher aspects of reality you otherwise could not. Humanity has yet to encounter anything that cannot be consistently explained in more and more detail, as we investigate it further.
We can and do answer complex questions. That human society is too disorganized to disseminate the answers we do have, and act on them at scale, isn't going to be changed by explaining the same thing slightly better.
Imagine trying to argue against a perfect proof. Take something as basic as 1 + 1 = 2. Now imagine an argument for something much more complex - like a definitive answer to climate change, or consciousness, or free will - delivered with the same kind of clarity and irrefutability.
Absolutely nothing about humans makes me think we are incapable of finding such answers on our own. And if we are genuinely incapable of developing a definitive answer on something, I'm more inclined to believe there isn't one, than assume that we are simply too "small-minded" to find an answer that is obvious to the hypothetical superintelligence.
But precision of thought orders of magnitude beyond our own.
This is just the "god doesn't need to make sense to us, his thoughts are beyond our comprehension" -argument, again.
Just like a five-year-old thinks they understand what it means to be an adult - until they grow up and realize they had no idea.
They don't know, because we don't tell them. Children in adverse conditions are perfectly capable of understanding the realities of survival.
You are using the fact that there are things we don't understand, yet, as if it were proof that there are things we can't understand, ever. Or eventually figure out on our own.
That non-sentients cannot comprehend sentience (ants and humans) has absolutely no relevance on whether sentients are able to comprehend other sentients (humans and machine intelligences).
I think machine thinking, in contrast to the human mind, will just be a faster processor of logic.
There is absolutely nothing stopping the weakest modern CPU from running the exact same code as the fastest modern CPU. The only difference will be the rate at which the work is completed.
This is the same logic people apply to God being incomprehensible.
Are you suggesting that if such a thing can be built, its word should be gospel, even if it is impossible for us to understand the logic behind it?
I don't subscribe to this. Logic is logic. You don't need a new paradigm of mind to explore all conclusions that exist. If something cannot be explained and comprehended, transmitted from one sentient mind to another, then it didn't make sense in the first place.
And you might bring up some of the stuff AI has done in material science as an example of it doing things human thinking cannot. But that's not some new kind of thinking. Once the molecular or material structure was found, humans have been perfectly capable of comprehending it.
All it's doing, is exploring the conclusions that exist, faster. And when it comes to societal challenges, I don't think it's going to find some win-win solution we just haven't thought of. That's a level of optimism I would consider insane.
Even if it is, I don't see what it's going to conclude that we haven't already.
If we do build "the AI that will save us" it's just going to tell us "in order to ensure your existence as a species, take care of the planet and each other" and I really, really, can't picture a scenario where we actually listen.
All the definition really requires, is that the character act hostile, but does so without being genuine or intentional, and is able to be their real loving self in certain circumstances or with time.
If it says bluetooth, then it can do bluetooth even if it comes with a dongle.
A lot of keyboards support bluetooth, but also come with a dongle in order to have the option for a dedicated wireless connection.
Bluetooth is convenient, but if you care about latnecy, it's horrid. Bluetooth mice and keyboards are noticably worse for performance gaming due to the additional delay in button presses and movements.
Hence people tend to prefer to use the dongle if possible, as it allowa for a significantly higher polling rate. Doesn't mean the keyboard won't work just fine on bluetooth.
Total disney princess. She should have a
villain-songI-want-song.