regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026Also was saying the Greenlaw late hit shouldn't be a penalty and the game has gotten softer since he retired, when he would've been the first person complaining to refs if that had happened to him 060
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026You saying that is what he is claiming doesn't make it true, jfc 000
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026Seriously, to make the statement "AI is not conscious" then you need to define two things: what you mean by "AI", and what you mean by "conscious". Both halves of that are pretty damn hard to define and if you can do that comprehensively then you should be selling it. 000
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026WTF do you mean the basis of the debate can't be part of the debate lol Why not? Because you said so? 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026Nah you are going from point A to point J to point € and getting annoyed I don't have a map 000
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026That's not what he's saying at all. He's saying it is possible it is conscious, because it has reasoning skills, and reasoning skills seem to have high correlation with what we would call consciousness 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026Yeah it's pretty hard to prove it isn't, though! Somehow our definition of "conscious" disallows pet rocks but allows the possibility of something as simple as a fungus. It's really hard to say why that is. We have no agreed upon scientific definition of "consciousness". That's the entire point!! 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026How is any of that relevant to the discussion at hand 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026Yes, I do. Burden of proof is that if you make a declarative statement (such as "AI is conscious" or "AI is not conscious") then it is your burden to prove that statement. Those of us saying "AI could be conscious, but it is nearly impossible to say for certain" have no burden of proof 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026But also no why does that mean I have to disinclude reasoning capability as a tenet of consciousness? Are you saying birds and octopus cannot reason? 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026Sure, and still you haven't negated the possibility of AI being conscious 200
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026Yes and asserting that something does not have consciousness -- as opposed to saying "it is possible this thing is conscious" -- would require the proof to come from the side making a definitive statement. You'd have to test your hypothesis, and that's the entire point. 000
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026Nothing you've said suggests AI does not have consciousness. You've raised other, related questions that don't negate the hypothesis that AI is conscious 000
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026We don't know this. The idea that birds, octopus, and other various species are conscious is not new! 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026Yeah maybe it is! Without defining consciousness that is very possible. How does that disprove that AI is conscious 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026So why is similarity to human relevant to the debate at hand 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026It's only relevant if you are saying earthworms are DEFINITELY not conscious and also the definition of consciousness is dependent on how similar something is to a human 110
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026You can chew that kid's ass all you want but we don't have to say it's okay 130
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026You implied that every news outlet should only pay people to think about that handful of stuff you said, and doing work that is not thinking about those things is unnecessary and bad. So why is my job not bad? It's not thinking about women etc, just like Mr. Barnwell's is not about those things 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026Wait so every company needs to have people whose job it is to think about those things? I work in medical supplies, should I give notice Monday to start pursuing a career in thinking about these things 200
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 11/10/2026Actually a lot of news outlets pay a lot of people to think about those things 110
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 10/10/2026I will stop being a Sox fan if I see a second of Hagen Smith on TV today 051
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 10/10/2026To be very clear, the AI you probably use is basically the kindergarten version of what is discussed as possibly conscious. (I disagree it is conscious, but just making it clear that the broad commercial stuff isn't what is being discussed in that regard.) 130
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 10/10/2026Do you think they're also aware that it is literally Bill's job to think about football 120
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 07/10/2026Oh no you've really done it now... all the men who don't understand Fight Club are about to flood your mentions telling you Fight Club is ackshually all about anticapitalism 150
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 06/10/2026That means you're the second best friend in the group 000
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 02/10/2026You're aware that there's no reason to believe this Sashi person is affiliated with any AI company, and there is zero evidence that the graph in the original tweet was published by anyone other than this Twitter rando, right? Like, this is just a random person posting about AI. 000
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 01/10/2026It purely comes down to this: assuming having a certain asset gives you positive EV for a given at-bat, and you are given the option to have that asset either on the first AB of the game or the last AB of the game, then 100/100 times it is advantageous to do it on the last AB. 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 01/10/2026The reason it is more valuable to use them in later innings is because the inning is higher leverage, because you may not get more innings. 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 01/10/2026You're not listening. I'm not saying only use them late -- I'm saying inning affects leverage of an at bat as well as men on and outs. The reason it is more valuable to use them with men on is because the AB is higher leverage, because you may not get men on again. 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 01/10/2026Literally by the math shared in the above article, playing with fewer challenges DOES affect expected value for a given AB. It's small, but it is there. And that minimal per-AB loss is maximized when literally all but one AB in the game is losing EV. 200
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 01/10/2026Terrible analogy because blackjack doesn't have a limited number of hands to be won. It's not that the first inning AB is less valuable than the ninth inning AB, it's that it is lower leverage. It's literally the exact same situation as the early-in-the-count challenge. 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 01/10/2026It's literally the same logic as you gave about it being later in the count, but in a more macro sense. Just like challenging before strike three or ball four is bad because those pitches are decisive, the earlier in the game it is, the less impactful the AB is. 110
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 01/10/2026But if you cheer for the White Sox it's only half weird 000
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 30/09/2026Can we just form one "Sox" team with the Chicago offense and the Boston pitchers plz 001
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 29/09/2026They'll still complain non-stop at the $6 taken out biweekly for Union dues 030
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 28/09/2026No, seriously if you believe that I have to assume you were a child in 2020 000
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 28/09/2026I have an honest question so please don't get upset with me outright: Are you 12? 150
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 25/09/2026I can't wait for the big 10,000th episode clip show 030
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 25/09/2026Or maybe it is silent discrimination against young women, who as a demographic are the most likely group to have iced coffee. (Said as an upper 30s man who drinks a lot of iced coffee.) 0160
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 24/09/2026Bears, unfortunately, seem to still be experiencing this 000
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 24/09/2026Weren't the Jaguars' issues early last year similar? Lots of procedural penalties early in the year, especially with a hyped up new playcaller? 100
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 23/09/2026Hey didn't you just say we shouldn't impeach him 001
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 23/09/2026Also, the most lost I have ever felt -- even as someone who was halfway through college by the time smart phones existed -- was as a child. We aren't handing Google Maps to 7 year olds, but those are the most disorienting ages. 010
regross527.bsky.social @regross527.bsky.social · 22/09/2026I suppose I should say "mastery" or "expertise" there, not intelligence. 000
