Профиль

Join us in Vienna! We are looking for a #PhD student and a #Postdoc to investigate #innovation in great #apes: PhD ad: share.eva.mpg.de/index.php/s/... Postdoc ad: share.eva.mpg.de/index.php/s/... Application deadline: August 17th. Please share widely!

P.P.S. I agree that it's outrageous that anyone should expect you to do anything when you aren't being paid, so I think it's right to say no then. (American academia's 10-month salary is still way higher than our 12-month salary, though!)

P.S. Sorry for the rude word but (1) I am English, and (2) they are c ...

I think this is a universal. Academia is basically built on the premise that some people say yes to stuff, and some people say no to stuff; and the people who say no say that knowing that someone else will pick up the slack. And they are cunts.

In England we still get paid in the summer but given the admin load that comes with the academic year, I still feel entitled to disappear a bit outside term time. I reply to emails but have no intention of being in the office.

Which months? October seems like a problem. July and August seems like it should be a given.

This seems likely to be an issue only for people who habitually wear more than one pair. Are there any such people?

I don't know, but this whole thread has an air of smug middle class intellectuals express contempt for guys like this, and I don't love it. Isn't that why people are really voting for Reform?

The quoted text here is misleading. In the full comment he contrasts people who drive to work with bus users, whom he identifies as students and the elderly. It's not crazy to think that in Durham that makes bus users skew middle class.

Adelaida, a subadult female chimpanzee, is seen wearing a leafy branch around her neck. This seems to be part of a cultural tradition in the Nouabale-Ndoki National Park (Republic of Congo) seen on: wcs_congo (Instagram) www.instagram.com/p/DaxFAnfDkri/ photo: G. Gaudin/WCS

Also, let's take a moment to think how much good could be done for real humans and animals with the resources currently being wasted on questions about AI consciousness.

Congratulations!

I'm no expert on AI, but it's evidently an area where philosophers have much to contribute. It's going to be hard to do that if we can't first approach the topic calmly.

(7) A performative contradiction in your conclusion? Check. "In any case, the fact remains that we may be creating a new species of morally important beings ... and we should treat the issue with the seriousness it deserves." Presumably not by writing slop like this, though.

(6) Some "lol wtaf do you understand science? or even basic circularity?" methods proposals? Check. "We could also conduct routine check-ins to better understand their wellbeing: asking [AIs] how they feel, observing their preferences[.]"

(5) Some uncritically accepted, self-serving tech bro nonsense? Check. "[W]e do not know for sure whether or not current AI systems are conscious[.]" Yes we do and no they are not.

(4) A survey of the devout interpreted as evidence that God exists? Check. "[A]ccording to surveys we and fellow researchers have conducted, most experts consider ... "

(3) Some bullshit numbers pulled out of a hat for a veneer of scientific respectability? Check. "When asked during testing to estimate the probability that it is a moral patient ... [Claude] gave numbers ranging from 5% to 40%"

(2) A fallacious slide from logically possible to THIS IS HAPPENING? Check. "[T]he .. growth in AI means that, once we produce the first artificial moral patients, we will soon after have enormous quantities ... their collective interests would outweigh those of all humans on Earth combined."

(1) Getting worked up about things that are logically possible? Check. (It's still the weakest possible reason to care about something.) "[M]ost experts consider AI consciousness possible in principle[.]"