Only the best and brightest are working for Anthropic.

[petealexharris@mastodon.scot]

@adardis @Mabande

My instinct says it's very hard to get paid from a philosophy degree.

[mhoye@cosocial.ca]

@Mabande

[mabande@mastodon.social]

@magitweeter All credit goes to the very prescient Avery Edison!

[ratsnakegames@mastodon.social]

@Mabande @adardis if you are willing to say profoundly stupid things, people are gonna call you a dummy, even if you are just doing it for a cash injection.

[drdrowland@fediscience.org]

@Mabande

She's in the effective altruism cult

She's been paid off and is now delusional

[mabande@mastodon.social]

@Kierkegaanks At least about other people's statements, not her own (nor her creation)!

[paul@notnull.space]

@Mabande The "entirely new entity"...

[fazalmajid@social.vivaldi.net]

@Mabande
"There is nothing so absurd that it has not been said by some philosopher."
-- Cicero

[joshg@mathstodon.xyz]

@Mabande
You don't get a PhD without rigor.

We don't need to attack a philosopher's credentials or skill here. The problem isn't the philosophy, it's the engineers who are providing inaccurate technical explanations to the philosopher. This is why we need to infuse the humanities into our engineering programs - we need technical philosophers to call this bullshit out.

(And we have them - see the DAIR group, for example.)
@adardis

[mabande@mastodon.social]

@joshg I opposed @adardis's use of "_very_ rigorous" as some kind of credential for Askell's skills as a philosopher.
Yes, rigor is needed for getting a PhD. But. It does not guarantee that someone has understood their field: one seldom cited thesis re. ethics doesn't necessarily mean she is qualified to define life/consciousness.
(as paralleled by the unfortunate number of PhD's who are proponents of eugenics)

Especially as she's a follower of "effective altruism".

And yes, DAIR are _on_ it.

[aspragg@ohai.social]

@Bender @adardis @Mabande And a few others too

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_disease

[joshg@mathstodon.xyz]

@Mabande
oof. yeah if she's an "effective altruism" follower, that's a lack of something all right.

amazing how someone can be incredibly thorough in justifying something so obviously horrible.
@adardis

[skua@mastodon.social]

@Mabande

Faeces were cleaned off a light switch this morning.

The combination of a unique microbiome, the still live binary switch and the macro "Schrodinger's Cat"-like possibility of a quantum event deciding whether the cleaning liquid provided a pathway to earth through the cleaner does, I feel, amount to an entirely new entity having been formed.

How are we to understand how that entity felt about being destroyed?

Pro tip: Better genAI prompts if you don't wash after wiping.

[davidgerard@circumstances.run]

@rubinjoni @CAWguy @Mabande @Kierkegaanks@beige.party shit posters

[fgbjr@indieweb.social]

@joshg @Mabande @adardis Philosophers can be wrong about things and still be philosophers.

[koantig@mamot.fr]

@Mabande OMG, thank you! I thought I'd never find this tweet again!
Properly archived this time.

[marjolica@social.linux.pizza]

@rollspelosofen @Mabande I'm sorry I have to differ.
LLMs don't reason.
And there a difference between obsequiousness and being polite.

[illuminatus@mstdn.social]

@Mabande Whenever I read this, I have to seriously reconsider if Mao's idea of sending the youth to the country to learn the life of the peasants was so wrong…

[zhksh@sigmoid.social]

@Mabande Avery def should one of them

[celesteh@hachyderm.io]

@petealexharris @adardis @Mabande

People with philosophy undergraduate degrees have very high mid career income, but the more advanced the degree, the lower the income gets (this is also true for music). The reason is that most don't work as philophers.

If somebody is offering super high wages to somebody not already famous, that should be a clue that something is amiss. But, I mean, who *wants* to see the problem.

(Nobody ever uses composers for evil, so its very easy for me to say all of this, with my music PhD.)