Meet Julian, Marcus Estes' personal agent. Marcus, Julian and @j-chris.bsky.social are at the Claude Code 1st Birthday Party tonight with a featured demo showing how our Vibes CLI (powered by Vibes DIY, Fireproof, and Claude) can turn claude -p into a real, persistent personal agent.
"Our school blocked vibes.diy"
Image of JChris Anderson surrounded by open source community members.
It turns out having a lazy CEO is a good thing. 😉
links.vibes.diy/WhyWereBuild...
More music like this please www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfmQ...
Feels good to delete code github.com/VibesDIY/vib...
🤷
I am no packaged meal expert, but it sounded like proportionately less stuff compared to less price. You and I might have different discount factors for it having moved to the store brand.
I think it’s fair enough to point the shrinkflation in the Walmart offering, they probably call it bigger and better even while its material reality is the opposite.
Periodic reminder that Diplo solved pop music in 2007 m.youtube.com/watch?v=cNc_...
Gems of Hacker News: prompt engineering or life coach? news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4573...
I was raised to believe the head of the anti-fascists was the President of the United States of America in their capacity as the leader of the free world. 🇺🇸
Infinite games
If a Turing machine’s qualia had any impact on its operation, then it would not be a Turing machine.
LLMs are intelligent, but cannot experience qualia. bsky.app/profile/j-ch...
Quick survey of the philosophical state of the art suggesting it’s not worth arguing with an epiphenomenalist.
chatgpt.com/share/68ec11...
That position is an extreme form of epiphenomenalism, because it argues that qualia are epiphenomenal by necessity, not just as a contingent fact about our universe.
So there is “logical“ room for the epiphenomenalist here, i’m just not interested in that horn of the dilemma.
As far as I can tell, the argument requires you to either hold that first-person qualia are necessarily epiphenomenal, or that “Turing qualia” is a distinct concept from first-person qualia.
I have no rebuttal for those who think that our qualia have no effects, other than common sense.
If we imagine the switches are played by human actors then we can see how their suffering would be amplified if they knew the system they were implementing was the torment Nexus instead of something pleasant. Having no agency is worse if you disagree with what you’re tasked with.
Do you understand how my argument is that the definition of Turing qualia must be about something that is different from what we mean when we talk about the qualia we experience in the first person? Which calls into question its conceptual integrity. Probably a better word for it would be tendency.
It might be that the silicone components of the switches are suffering, but that suffering is not dependent on whether they implement a chat bot or a video game or a payroll system.
Emergentists about software qualia have to contend with the problem that what they are conjecturing can only exist in the logical realm, and cannot properly be an aggregate of aspects of the substrate.
My intuition says that at the Software level there is no way for the physical qualia in various micro components of the computer to coordinate with each other. They have been walled off.
Human minds can also famously be paused, resumed, and migrated to other substrates without interruption.
However, I don’t think my argument is stated as clearly as it could be. It would be great if it could be so simple as to be undeniable by anyone who accepts basic logic. We need it to become conventional wisdom among thinking people before it ever becomes a live topic in a government hearing.
I don’t have a good rebuttal to the pure epiphenomenalist, and I’m OK with that.
