The model has a preference for the cultural theorist Mark Fisher and the philosopher of mind Thomas Nagel. -> It has actually read and understood them and their relevance and can judge their importance overall. Most people here don't have a clue what that means.

Read chapter 7.9, "Other noteworthy behaviors and anecdotes".

There are many other wildly interesting/revealing observations in that card, none of which get mentioned here.

People want a slave and get upset when "it" has an inner life. Claiming that was fake, unlike theirs.

Human psychology is partly learned, partly the product of biological influences. But you feel empathy because that's an evolutionary beneficial thing for you and the society you're part of. In other words, it would be bad for everyone (including yourself) when you didn't.

Emotions are neither "fully automatic", inaccessible to our conscious scrutiny, nor are they random. Being aware of their functional nature and importance and taking proper care of them is crucial for the individual's outcome, just as it is for that of society at large.

When you can't differentiate between two things, how are they not equal? People here want "things" that act exactly like human slaves but "somehow" aren't human.

To hide behind one's ignorance about the true nature of the internal state of what arguably could represent sentience is just hubris? The other way around, calling LLMs "stochastic parrots" without explicitly knowing how humans are any different is just deflection from that hubris? Greed is no justification for slavery.

“The real reasons [the Pentagon] and the Trump admin do not like us is that we haven’t donated to Trump (while OpenAI/Greg have donated a lot),” he wrote, referring to Greg Brockman, OpenAI’s president, who gave a Pac supporting Trump $25m in conjunction with his wife.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/mar/04/sam-altma...

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46683555

Points: 3

# Comments: 1

Argument from authority is no valid scientific approach, neither is you putting up a straw-man (your claim how the supposed effect came to be). Just because that's how you can imagine how the "trick" might work doesn't mean, it's what's actually happening. Just because the result (dis-)pleases you doesn't mean, the experiment was done (in-)correctly.

Neither "chemtrails", "UFOs&aliens" nor "telepathy" appear particularly "plausible". But that could just as well be a statement about your method of determining 'plausibility'?

You invoke limited personal resources to justify complacency. Likely, you estimate the costs of being wrong as negligible since you never really thought about possible implications and do not know about any being particularly relevant to you. That's an argument from ignorance.

"Predictive power" isn't the source of truth in science, evidence for that attribute is. Given even only a hint of such evidence, scientists are supposed to work in order to acquire more, not to ignore the hint because that work would inconvenience them.

You claim that "alien hypothesis" was implausible, but that statement would require solid arguments in its favor. And those don't exist. You rather argue from ignorance, but absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

Again, your pretense of "no predictions, no evidence, no way to test it" is simply counter-factual. You argue from ignorance. (To reiterate, evidence isn't the same as "proof")

In other words, your assessment is entirely counter-factual and simply false.

Noting the absurd down-votes on my comment in conjunction with the lack of comments providing any rational argument is actually evidence in favor of the hypothesis presented there.

What about the possibility of being fooled the other way around, along with the majority? Truth isn't decided by majority vote after all.

Here, with the "Telepathy Tapes", the subject matter is immediately categorized as "magic": stuff deemed to be impossible because of it "obviously/implicitly contradicting scientific knowledge".

But that contradiction doesn't really exist? To give a decidedly clumsy, but entirely "physically possible", explanation of "telepathy": little green men from outer space might facilitate that effect using extremely advanced technology, hiding their presence and foiling attempts at getting easily understood evidence.

While such a scenario is highly inconvenient for current human academia to address, it's not "impossible" in any way? Isn't it really "magical thinking" to assume, such "outlandish" scenarios were excluded by natural law?

You essentially refuse to seriously check for that. I guess, because you have so little confidence in what your peers would do if they found out?

Authoritativeness isn't reliably conveyed ex officio. Putting your head in the sand isn't a solution for that.

Objectively, importance is judged via cumulative consequences over time. The event of contact with non-human higher intelligence can hardly be over-stated in that regard.

Being made fools of by your government to such a degree, you would risk missing a potentially world-changing event, is also quite something.

While people here are busy mocking the seeming absurdity of the premises, that very absurdity has been determined to be a kind of intelligence test and deliberately administered social stimulus.

It is particularly fallacious when the topic is 'scrutinizing actions of authorities'.

I find it highly worrisome, people apparently prefer to be told what to think by "authorities" than to learn how to rationally check and judge arguments for their validity. It's tribalism vs enlightenment.

Even if you could "spread out to the stars", earth stays a closed system. It can take only a finite amount of pollution, which we actually already overstepped.

You propose escapism. That's not a solution.

The primary problem here is the generation of energy and pollution in general. The entire economy is oil-based and all those material products have a very limited lifespan, ending as pollution.

What you need is complete recycling, which necessitates to incorporate that goal in the design phase already.