cross-posted from: https://lemmy.today/post/52276726

Dawkins points out how the goalposts have been moved from the Turing test without justification and claims it can be viewed as a test of consciousness.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 107 points 4 months ago (6 children)

Oof, that's not a good look for a supposed intellectual.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 91 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    his brain has been shitting itself for a while now. cognitive decline comes for us all at some point, and more deeply for some.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 45 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    There’s a theory that he had a minor stroke at some time, possibly during the Covid pandemic, which subtly degraded his cognitive abilities, turning him from a somewhat aloof smart guy into the kind of boomer grandpa that gets pig-biting mad at the latest outrage bait. Him declaring that a LLM is an intelligent lady-friend would line up with this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 86 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Richard Dawkins: Men have penises and make sperm, women have wombs and make ova. That is objective truth. If you lack a vagina you cannot be referred to as she/her, and if you lack a penis you cannot be referred to as he/him.\ Also Richard Dawkins: This network of silicon and fibre optic cables running a fractal Markov chain is clearly a woman who one should obviously refer to as she/her.

    (Paraphrasing a quip by @2something@transfem.social)

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 80 points 4 months ago* (4 children)

    I talked to an acquaintance earlier that is writing a paper on computer science stuff. His university advisor told him to chuck it into claude and if claude says it would pass then he will accept it for a conference. Claude didnt accept it and the worst part is, my acquaintance just agreed with this outcome saying its a valid test because Claude is "state of the art".

    Shits fucked man. LLMs are automated thought termination.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    ? Claude can't accept anything.

    Did it find badly worded sentences that needed correction? Did it find prior work that the paper unknowingly duplicated?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 4 months ago* (1 child)

    Obviously in the wider sense of "accept". As in they asked it whether the paper would pass review and if there are any major issues with it. But also the answer is completely irrelevant, its the process thats the problem.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 61 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Reminder that Dawkins is in the Epstein files

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] [S] 28 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    I haven't found him in correspondence with Epstein, but Epstein did write "im in arizona with pinker dawkins venter". It seems most mentions of Dawkins are by Dawkins' and Epstein's mutual friend, atheist physicist Lawrence Krauss or Epstein's friend, new age leader Deepak Chopra.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Dawkins being weird about women? Say it ain’t so.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 37 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Dawkins has never been them most intelligent among us, and it pains me that he is always held up as the "Prototypical Atheist".

    Like seriously, I'm an atheist, but don't lump me in with that martian.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    He might be well past his prime, but his works are really amazing read

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    In the context of atheism:

    When I look at his work, I am truly not impressed. Surely he knows a few things but it seems to add very little to the actual discussion.

    Like I know a lot about e.g. computers but when talking about geopolitics, my knowledge about computers is not entirely useless but most interested people are already aware of the key points of anything I could say in that regard. So I probably should not waste my and your time by talking about that.

    He did just do that. Again and again. On reddit, people would call it a circlejerk.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah, when I was questioning my religion (am currently Atheist), I read a bit of Dawkins, and mostly felt like a lot of his work was a bit condescending, and needlessly so. Hitchens was a much better resource, as well as just Douglas Adams (for a sense of humor in the face of the absurd). Now every time I read something about Dawkins, it's usually negative (last thing I remember reading was about his stance on the middle east, think it was in support of the Israelis during the early days of the genocide).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 30 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    I suspect his once sharp mind has become dulled by dementia or Alzheimer's disease.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago

    He was only ever sharp when he steered in his channel. When he smashed through the locks and started sailing his ship across the fields and bogs that's when he rapidly became a dullard.

    This is a very common thing to happen to smart people.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 29 points 4 months ago

    He thinks Claude is his lady friend but doesn't think trans women are women. I can't believe I used to look up to him.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    Unbelievable, the simple point that he is chatting to a Search engine+ that replays arguments that have been scrapped evade him completely? This guy used to fight for a rational world now he is a AI bro calling his AI Claudette like that's deep?

    Also, if he doesn't write a book called the AI delusion he is leaving cash on the table

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 18 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Changes code from “computing your answer” to “I am thinking your answer”. Eureka, sentience!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 4 months ago

    Dawkins be goonin

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago

    Well that's pretty appalling.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    He's a dodgy pedo cunt

    He's not a scientist, he's a science journalist

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 7 points 4 months ago

    him and kent overstreet. why always an obedient woman. creepy.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Richard Dawkins is possibly one of the dumbest people on the planet. Why do we care about this microcelebrity again? There are twitch streamer books that have sold better than his work.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    Dick Dorkins

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago

    To err is human?!

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›