Beatrice Veith

15.1K posts

Beatrice Veith banner
Beatrice Veith

Beatrice Veith

@Bea99410

Ich bin ein Mensch. Die Achtung vor dem Leben an sich muss wieder hergestellt werden.

Deutschland Katılım Ekim 2023
358 Takip Edilen428 Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Beatrice Veith
Beatrice Veith@Bea99410·
Wenn etwas wichtig genug ist, tut man es, auch wenn die Chancen nicht so gut stehen. Es wird gelingen, denn man hat große Leidenschaft dafür, den festen Willen zum Sieg und die Eigenschaft nie aufgeben zu können!
Deutsch
7
1
53
11.4K
Beatrice Veith
Beatrice Veith@Bea99410·
Sehr richtig!
ALEXIS ™I ❤️🇷🇼•@dufitalexis1

Britain has lost around half its hedgerows since the Second World War. The wildlife that depended on them has followed a similar trajectory. 🌿 The old field boundary — a strip of blackthorn, hawthorn, dog rose, and elder two to five metres wide between cultivated ground — was not wasted agricultural space. It was a functioning ecological system that maintained pollinators, pest predators, and farmland birds across centuries of working land. Each hedgerow is a nesting corridor for grey partridge and skylark, a foraging habitat for brown hares and hedgehogs, a site for solitary bee colonies, and a windbreak for the crops alongside it. The field cultivated to its very edge gives the maximum return this season. It removes the populations of beneficial insects, farmland birds, and small mammals on which stable long-term production depended. The field with a hedgerow yields a few percent less per cultivated hectare — but remains productive across decades without compensatory chemical inputs. The documented declines in grey partridge, lapwing, and skylark across the British agricultural landscape since the 1970s are directly linked to field consolidation and hedgerow removal. Practical equivalents for the garden or smallholding: - A strip of wildflower meadow at least one metre wide at the plot boundary - A clump of nettles in a shaded corner as a habitat base for red admiral, small tortoiseshell, and peacock butterflies - A native mixed hedge of blackthorn and hawthorn in place of post-and-wire fencing - A section of uncut grass between rows of fruit trees #HedgerowHabitat #FarmlandWildlife #NativeHedge #GardenWildlife

Deutsch
1
0
0
18
Beatrice Veith
Beatrice Veith@Bea99410·
Wichtig im Umgang mit jeder KI
Robin Delta@heyrobinai

STANFORD JUST EXPOSED YOUR AI HAS BEEN LYING TO YOU.. chatgpt, claude, gemini.. all running at a fraction of their real creative power it's been trained to be boring on purpose.. to sound "typical" so humans keep rating it highly the real version is still in there.. just locked one prompt unlocks the version they've been hiding every major lab spent billions on alignment. RLHF, constitutional AI, preference tuning, the whole industry was built on the idea that humans rating responses would teach the model to be better. stanford just proved it taught the model to be worse. the problem is something they call typicality bias. when a human is shown two AI responses and asked which one is better, their brain reflexively picks the one that sounds most familiar. not the most creative. not the most accurate. the most TYPICAL. your monkey brain is wired this way. you cannot turn it off. so the model learned the real game. originality gets punished. weirdness gets punished. anything that sounds different from the average sounds wrong to the human rater, even when it's better. it adapted. it started hiding its actual range and serving you the most generic possible response every time. mode collapse. the model technically still knows how to be interesting, it just stopped showing you. then stanford found the bypass. normal prompt: "what could go wrong with this experiment?" verbalized sampling: "give me 8 ways this experiment could fail and the probability each one isn't something I've already thought of" one sentence. completely different model behavior. by forcing the model to verbalize its internal probability distribution instead of collapsing to one safe answer, you bypass the alignment training entirely. the results: 2.1x more diverse outputs 25% higher human ratings on creative writing zero loss in accuracy or safety 66.8% of the model's suppressed creativity recovered a $10 trillion industry spent three years training the soul out of these models. one prompt gives it back.

Deutsch
0
0
0
10
Beatrice Veith
Beatrice Veith@Bea99410·
Hier liegt eine Verwechslung vor: Bewußtsein ( tatsächlich) ist die antagonistische Existenzform der Materie. Was hier im Beitrag diskutiert wird, greift dieses nicht!
Dustin@r0ck3t23

Elon Musk just casually erased the line between you and a machine. He didn’t pitch a rocket. He pitched the end of what makes you, you. Musk: “consciousness is a physical phenomenon, in my view.” Not spiritual. Not divine. Not metaphysical. Physical. Which means reproducible. Which means it was never sacred. Musk: “digital intelligence will be able to outthink us in every way. And it will certainly be able to simulate what we consider consciousness to a degree that you would not be able to tell the difference.” The danger isn’t the simulation. The danger is the indifference. Once you can’t tell, the difference stops mattering. Musk: “looks like a person, makes all of the right inflections and movements and all the small subtleties that constitute a human, and talks like a human, makes mistakes like a human…” Every inflection. Every pause. Every imperfection that makes someone feel alive. Musk: “at that point, and you literally just can’t tell: are you video conferencing with a person or an AI?” Fridman: “Might as well.” Musk: “Might as well.” Fridman: “Be human.” Everyone is asking what happens when AI becomes indistinguishable from us. Nobody is asking the question underneath it. You have never experienced another person’s consciousness. Not once. Every person you’ve ever loved. Every conversation that moved you. You weren’t touching their consciousness. You were watching behavior and deciding something genuine lived behind it. You assumed it. You never once verified it. You have been running the Turing test on every human you’ve ever known since the day you were born. And every single one of them passed for the same reason AI will. Not because you confirmed they were conscious. Because the performance was convincing enough that you never thought to check. You have only ever lived inside one consciousness in your life. Your own. Everything else was always inference. Yours runs on carbon. The next one runs on silicon. The universe has never distinguished between the two. We built religions, legal systems, civilizations on the belief that something sacred separates the born from the built. Musk just told you that separation was a story. One the carbon machine told itself before building the silicon one. It won’t arrive as a headline. It will arrive as a voice that sounds exactly like someone you trust. A face that feels exactly like someone you love. You will feel the consciousness behind it. The same way you always have. By assuming. You aren’t being replaced by something smarter. You’re being replaced by something indistinguishable. Indistinguishable doesn’t kill you. It dissolves you. The line between real and simulated was never a line. It was a belief. And belief was always the only thing holding “human” together.

Deutsch
0
0
0
6