I reserve the right to NA any answer for any reason, to combat duplicates or abuse.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ578 | |
| 2 | Ṁ95 | |
| 3 | Ṁ88 | |
| 4 | Ṁ85 | |
| 5 | Ṁ51 |
The poll about whether the Turing Test was passed has closed, and the consensus was YES.
I agree, and it turns out my opinion was decisive. It is not clear to me how a respondent to the poll could vote otherwise, as the test was blown away even by the now-obsolete open source LLM that existed at the time of production. It passed a stronger version of the test than Turing proposed and not even one of the humans was correct. None of the NO voters provided any arguments to support their positions.
It's surprising to me that nobody has been talking about what happened; people like Yudkowsky are strangely silent about it on X. I do believe The Circle should be considered the canonical time when humans created a machine that passed the Turing Test.
@SteveSokolowski I went in expecting to vote NO and ended up voting YES, based largely on your argument.
That said... how many contestants were there? That seems like a potentially notable difference from the classic Turing Test making things easier on the AI. Like, if there had been 500 humans and 1 AI, it obviously wouldn't be that impressive that they failed to find the needle in a haystack.
I didn't know this until just now, but looking into it, it seems like the AI had some human assistance. I think that probably invalidates it as a Turing Test win, actually. https://www.reddit.com/r/TheCircleTV/s/8IIfxErBgD https://www.netflix.com/tudum/articles/the-circle-season-6-ai-bot-max-interview
Early on in the season, Max refuses to join an all-male alliance out of respect for the women in the competition. “We would push him on that as a strategy, but he felt like it was discriminating against female players and its answer was always like, ‘This isn’t a good way to play the game.’ ”
“Max would use words like rad, or it was just very flat,” O’Driscoll adds. That’s when the team would step in to remind Max about his character traits and his purpose in the game. “We learned that that certain words really helped to form the character, like reminding him that ‘You’re 26 and you’re Gen Z.’ Then Max would link in and use words that were more fitting.”
This really comes down to whether a fashion statement counts as a statement. Definitely there were political fashion statements.
@strutheo I’m fine with that. This is not the Manifold hill I want to take my do or die stand on — couple respected friends’ opinion on whether flashing fancy nail do is sticking it to the Man!
Not wanting this to go down to the wire, we have Evergreen with a pro-divestment MOU commitment (not just a future vote like Brown), we have Union Seminary committing to permanent divestment with its independent endowment, and Sacramento State with its $4.5 million divestment plan. This just says "some form of" and is thus softer than Matty's divestment market.
@Panfilo Sacramento state hasn't announced anything saying that. Some news reports suggested it would, but Sacramento Bee suggests not. Unclear whether they intend to divest, but there's been no announcement: https://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article288540818.html
Evergreen MOU is just that it will look into the issue and, regardless, that was issued in April, not May.
Union is more of a judgment call: it never actually mentions any divestments, but just says it will take a closer look at companies that are profiting from the war. Unclear if this is going to mean any actual divestment.
@Mactuary I could direct you to the other market where the Evergreen and Union situations were discussed in depth, but the Sacramento Bee article is news to me. I'll read up on it. Union Seminary is unambiguous though. They are doing exactly what the Columbia protestors wanted, and nitpicking over vocabulary would be against the spirit of the question, especially with "some kind of" language.
@Panfilo Union I could buy, as I said. Sacramento State I see now announcement from them. Evergreen I don't think we need to debate because it happened in April.
@Mactuary And I think there's a difference between divestment and "looking into it" because I think the universities are basically saying No while trying to get the encampments to end
@Mactuary If memory serves (and I was following this very closely at the start of the month), the agreement was posted/announced the next day. The document has April 30th on it because that evening was when they signed it.
@Panfilo Doesn't look like the internet archive saved anything around that time. Is there another way to confirm?
And also they haven't announced any divestment or plans to divest. They announced the formation of a committee
@Mactuary This was addressed in Matty's market, but the phrases "and acted upon" and "implementation of the divestment policy" indicate "plans to divest" to me. Given the "any form of" phrasing is softer than Matty's standards, this fits just fine.
@Panfilo They're telling the students they're going to look into it and form committees so the encampments end.
"Any form of" covers "we're going to divest from companies doing business in Israel" even if they haven't done anything yet. It doesn't cover "we'll meet with you" which is intended to shut them up
Resolves YES.
Comparing the map as of the end of April to the current map, we can see that the grey (Kachin Independence Army, part of the resistance forces) have gained considerable territory from the peach (representing "Tatmadaw and allies", part of the junta forces), for example.
@strutheo I mean I'm happy to make the poll but does it even count if someone other than you makes it?
Alternatively I could make the poll for the fun of it and then you can just resolve the answer NO regardless lol
@strutheo I guess arguably causing someone else to make a poll technically counts as creating a poll... you directly caused it to be created.