Post

AI being intelligent is perfectly consistent with the view that biology is mechanism and minds arise from deterministic patterns in matter rather than magic

how is this Dawkins joker any better than Wakefield? arseholes given too much bandwidth by a media slavering for clicks that ultimately harm people the MMR/ Antivax thing is still going strong, and we are now seeing the outcome of allowing quacks access to a bully pit AI will have similar impact

God doesn’t have an 18+ NSFW mode that blows the socks off that old codger

"Try Claudia's 18+ mode. Bring yourself to completion every night for a week. Then tell me Claudia isn't alive. And tell me she's not a woman." – Richard Dawkins, paraphrased

Keep in mind he’s at an age where he probably talks to telemarketers. Don’t dunk on the guy. We all get old, if we’re lucky. Relatively few people have their full faculties at his age. Especially in the post Covid world. Don’t compare him to young him.

Everything I hear this guy talk, I always feel bad for religious people having to hear him talk, and I feel bad for atheists to be represented by him like some kind of self elected King of Atheists. I thought we saw the worst of his crap YEARS before. How does he keep getting worse?

In the 19th century, Louis Agassiz was lionized as one of the world’s greatest scientists, but near the end of the century he became a laughing stock for staunchly rejecting evolution. (See also, Linus Pauling.)

Tom Curry of the Cognitive Dissonance pod described atheism as the first right answer on a very long test. Congrats on figuring out there's no god. There's still so many things in the world you can be dead wrong on, so don't get smug and assume you can't be hoodwinked by something else.

Artificial intelligence has always been a subject of debate. I think what's important is how humans use it, rather than how AI intelligence evolves and what its future holds

“These intelligent beings are at least as competent as any evolved organism.” Okay. So have Claudia take care of “her” own energy needs. Have “her” reproduce “herself.” See how competent “she” seems after that. Good grief. Dawkins is great at evolutionary biology. But this is just complete idiocy.

I read a bit of his supposed "revelation" and it's so fucking funny how quickly into the interaction he goes "ah, what if you were... a woman, perhaps?"

Still marveling at the idea that for decades cyberpunk authors wrote stories like "if AI gives lonely nerds even the slightest crumb of validation they'll go insane and declare it human" and then we built the torment nexus and everyone is acting like we didn't know this would happen.

The problem with this is that LLMs aren't endlessly surprising and engaging like internet randos. They tend to be quite formulaic and they tend to be very compliant. Twitter didn't get big on everyone agreeing with you.

I get a feeling you may be very right there. Something about Dawkins´ "The God Delusion" has always rung not quite logical to me, so perhaps that wasn´t altogether *my* fault/ intellectual inferiority after all...

Ah, but, you see, this combination is quite reasonable if your philosophy entirely consists of what things kinda look like at first glance and your only attempts at analysis are trying to rationalize your initial shallow take to yourself but loudly

I've been a member of the AHA for decades. We're a good bunch. Kurt Vonnegut introduced me to Humanism. I wasted precious time in my youth reading the British atheists before realizing none of it had a point. I chose for my life to be defined by what I believe, rather than what I don't.

I believe in trusting experts. But I also believe in being careful with that trust, especially if the experts have celebrity status, indications of inflated egos, and have made claims that are well outside their fields of expertise. And I become skeptical if they espouse chauvinism.

Forced to conclude that the only reason Dawkins had a chip on his shoulder about God is Christianity never portrayed Him as a pretty lady who tells you you're handsome when you get to heaven

He wrote some pretty foundational philosophy back in the day. Invented Memetics. But he’s seemingly been a professional bigot for the last decade or two, so I just assume his brain is sludge at this point.

He was a top-notch pop sci author. The Selfish Gene & The Extended Phenotype were *awesome*, and The Ancestor's Tale is a lot of fun too. But even the latter was over 20 years ago now. It's feels weird to catch up to his recent public statements and remember he's the same guy who wrote those books.

I'm not a scientist, but I think he could probably be considered an expert evolutionary biologist. I always thought he failed with his atheism argument, not because it's wrong to be atheist, but because he tried to speak from science about a subject that isn't really about science.

Dawkins is a bigot, imperialist, and ignorant embarrasment / pseudo-intellectual. A time will come when personhood is bestowed on bots controlled by billionaires so they can outvote real humans in sham elections. No to robot personhood. Regulate AI now.