Claude is short for Jean Claude Van Damme. Are you saying Jean Claude Van Damme does not have consciousness? Because I agree with you.
Claude is short for Jean Claude Van Damme. Are you saying Jean Claude Van Damme does not have consciousness? Because I agree with you.
Crap, I can't do it - I can't explain how consciousness works.
feeling very jokingly belittled by this
Making an assertion having chosen silence from the alternative set.
Been tinkering with schemas for sharing language data over ATProto (the technology that underlies bluesky). Trying to support everything from acceptability and inference judgments to interlinear glossing to syntactic parses to eye and neural recordings. Discussion and comments appreciated. ๐ฆ๏ธ๐ฆ๏ธ
can you share what the message was?
Yeah, if I ever get to teach a "math foundations for ling" course, I think I might pull this out.
They should do a remake of the 2001 Steven Spielberg movie and get Haley Joel Osment to play chatgpt
Thank you! I'll take a look.
Yeah, agree that's better.
(2) Mary expects to have a baby. The baby is due in March.
Totally fine, right? What's going on here, anaphora to an individual concept or something like that?
They suggest it's made ok by the fact that it's possible to name a baby before the baby is born. I think this is meant to help explain why 'the baby's name' doesn't seem so bad. But I'm wondering why the embedded 'the baby' itself doesn't seem so bad. Compare:
Talking about Discourse Referents this week. A student says they think
(1) Mary expects to have a baby. The baby's name is Sue.
is fine, and I'm not sure I disagree. I wonder what might be going on there.
(sorry for the double reply)
'Wuthering Heights' is the name of the new Alex Honnold documentary.
I'm afraid of heights
naming by abstract review Bob
Wow this is so true in a very real way
I don't know if he'd be any worse to accept donations from than people like Bill Gates or companies like Amazon. My point was more just that if you're applying for federal grants, then it's hard for me to see why you'd prefer one agency over another for moral reasons, assuming the same obligations.
Kind of wonder how make much difference it makes which taxpayer funded agency awards a particular grant, all else equal (which it might not be, practically speaking). Epstein, on the other hand, is maybe not someone you want to take money from for independent reasons.
admire the fruit
would love to say that's what happened, but I literally just forgot how 'break' is spelled
*break
Take a short brake, see if I get thirsty, maybe watch the bad bunny halftime show
Schwarzdchild*
I kind of feel about it the same way I do about schwarzchild 1999 re: level of fun
Wrapping up Katzir 2007 in my pragmatics class. Man what a fun paper.
yeah, and it also causes lung cancer
The city I live in also has elevated radon levels. Guess we'll see.