Positive users agreed that 'solve alignment' framing traps AI problem solving by creating misleading language games and failing to model errors in complex phenomena.
Based on 3 visible X reactions from 8 accounts; directional sample.
Ask a question below.
Published answers will appear here.
Yes! If you want to model complex phenomena you need to put the error somewhere.. continental philosophy type writing puts it in your face by using underspecified poetry that vaguely gestures at things, rationalism / anglo philosophy hides or by defining some spherical cows and then making everything downstream of that feel perfectly rational
@nabeelqu Yes. I see language games all over AI discourse. Invocations of Bayes, for example, create the illusion that there's a probability-calculus game being played, when in reality it's a bunch of avowals.
@rsnous This is cool, what's it from? Grothendieck's writings are really good on this topic too.
Wittgenstein's critique of many philosophical problems that they're like frame control: basically, the words you use trap you into a certain way of seeing the world, and from *that* perspective the problem appears impossible to solve. The phrase 'solve alignment' is like this.
Positive users agreed that 'solve alignment' framing traps AI problem solving by creating misleading language games and failing to model errors in complex phenomena.
Based on 3 visible X reactions from 8 accounts; directional sample.
Ask a question below.
Published answers will appear here.