Shame climate change has rendered it about as useful as looking out the window at predicting the weather.

Cavity protection ain’t gonna cut it where they’re going.

🇺🇸 “Baadel a waader” 🇺🇸

✅ Math is hard

❌ This math is hard

That’s why I mentioned those other console exclusive features. Anyway the original point was about cost and I think the Series X was the best value for money at launch this gen…

• Half the price of building a similar PC at launch.

• Rewards are higher on console so recoup the cost more than PC.

• I use Game Pass on both PC and Xbox with a single account to play multiplayer so cheaper on that front.

We’re half way through the generation now though. PC parts have got cheaper, Game Pass Ultimate conversion ratio has dropped and rewards are drying up so probably wouldn’t advocate it anymore. PC likely to be better value next gen.

I always gamed predominantly on PC but this generation I did the maths as PC parts had become over-inflated so decided to give console a try. I still think it was a decent decision for this generation…

Game Pass can be had waaaaaay cheaper than that and you can get it all back and more in rewards points.

I spent £450ish on the console at launch including controller and a game. Equivalent GPU was £500 or more at the time.

Spent £150ish on Game Pass sub from November 2020 to July 2026 which has allowed me to play countless games I never would have bought outright.

I’ve made over £700 back in vouchers with over 2 years left to accumulate more. Spent half of it on games, and controllers, headset, etc. all of which I can use on my PC. Plan on saving the remaining vouchers to put towards my next PC build.

This is without mentioning other console benefits like low maintenance, Quick Resume and the fact I can use one copy of a game to play with two players online.

eXpLaIN hOw im OuT oF pOcKeT.

And again…

You’ve just copied my arguments yet again.

Seek help, your projections are concerning.

You don’t really have one lol. You’ve read too many pop-sci articles from AI proponents and haven’t understood any of the underlying tech.

All your retorts boil down to copying my arguments because you seem to be incapable of original thought. Therefore it’s not surprising you believe neural networks are approaching sentience and consider imitation to be the same as intelligence.

You seem to think there’s something mystical about neural networks but there is not, just layers of complexity that are difficult for humans to unpick.

You argue like a religious zealot or Trump supporter because at this point it seems you don’t understand basic logic or how the scientific method works.

Once again not offering any sort of valid retort, just claiming anyone that disagrees with you doesn’t understand the field.

I suggest you take a cursory look at how to argue in good faith, learn some maths and maybe look into how neural networks are developed. Then study some neuroscience and how much we comprehend the brain and maybe then we can resume the discussion.

You obviously have hate issues

Says the person who starts chucking out insults the second they get downvoted.

From what I gather, anyone that disagrees with you is a tech bro with issues, which is quite pathetic to the point that it barely warrants a response but here goes…

I think I understand your viewpoint. You like playing around with AI models and have bought into the hype so much that you’ve completely failed to consider their limitations.

People do understand how they work; it’s clever mathematics. The tech is amazing and will no doubt bring numerous positive applications for humanity, but there’s no need to go around making outlandish claims like they understand or reason in the same way living beings do.

You consider intelligence to be nothing more than parroting which is, quite frankly, dangerous thinking and says a lot about your reductionist worldview.

You may redefine the word “understanding” and attribute it to an algorithm if you wish, but myself and others are allowed to disagree. No rigorous evidence currently exists that we can replicate any aspect of consciousness using a neural network alone.

You say pessimistic, I say realistic.

We know Google Translate gets things wrong sometimes so I was just wondering if Russia means “Special” Military Operation in the same way the Americans mean “Special” Olympics?

Possible, yes. It’s also entirely possible there’s interactions we are yet to discover.

I wouldn’t claim it’s unknowable. Just that there’s little evidence so far to suggest any form of sentience could arise from current machine learning models.

That hypothesis is not verifiable at present as we don’t know the ins and outs of how consciousness arises.

Then it would logically follow that all the other functions of a human brain are similarly “possible” if we train it right and add enough computing power and memory. Without ever knowing the secrets of the human brain. I’d expect the truth somewhere in the middle of those two perspectives.

Lots of things are possible, we use the scientific method to test them not speculative logical arguments.

Functions of the brain

These would need to be defined.

But that means it should also be reproducible by similar means.

Can’t be sure of this… For example, what if quantum interactions are involved in brain activity? How does the grey matter in the brain affect the functioning of neurons? How do the heart/gut affect things? Do cells which aren’t neurons provide any input? Does some aspect of consciousness arise from the very material the brain is made of?

As far as I know all the above are open questions and I’m sure there are many more. But the point is we can’t suggest there is actually rudimentary consciousness in neural networks until we have pinned it down in living things first.

You say maybe there’s not much to understand about the brain but I entirely disagree, it’s the most complex object in the known universe and we haven’t discovered all of it’s secrets yet.

Generating pictures from a vast database of training material is nowhere near comparable.

…or you might not.

It’s fun to think about but we don’t understand the brain enough to extrapolate AIs in their current form to sentience. Even your mention of “parts” of the mind are not clearly defined.

There are so many potential hidden variables. Sometimes I think people need reminding that the brain is the most complex thing in the universe, we don’t full understand it yet and neural networks are just loosely based on the structure of neurons, not an exact replica.

Have you ever considered you might be, you know, wrong?

No sorry you’re definitely 100% correct. You hold a well-reasoned, evidenced scientific opinion, you just haven’t found the right node yet.

Perhaps a mental gymnastics node would suit sir better? One without all us laymen and tech bros clogging up the place.

Or you could create your own instance populated by AIs where you can debate them about the origins of consciousness until androids dream of electric sheep?

No one is moving goalposts, there is just a deeper meaning behind the word “understanding” than perhaps you recognise.

The concept of understanding is poorly defined which is where the confusion arises, but it is definitely not a direct synonym for pattern matching.

Whilst everything you linked is great research which demonstrates the vast capabilities of LLMs, none of it demonstrates understanding as most humans know it.

This argument always boils down to one’s definition of the word “understanding”. For me that word implies a degree of consciousness, for others, apparently not.

To quote GPT-4:

LLMs do not truly understand the meaning, context, or implications of the language they generate or process. They are more like sophisticated parrots that mimic human language, rather than intelligent agents that comprehend and communicate with humans. LLMs are impressive and useful tools, but they are not substitutes for human understanding.

+1 for the S23.

I’ve been a Nexus/Pixel fan since the beginning but performance/battery is much better now the Samsungs have the Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 in them.

Camera is decent (marginally worse than Pixel for stills but better for video) and OneUI is far much more customisable and less obtuse than it was in the past.

Heheheh…Spurs.