Occhio all’inganno: alcuni al posto del ‘pensiero scientifico dominante’ vorrebbero far passare per buono il ‘pensiero antiscientifico dominante’, non certo il ‘pensiero scientifico non-dominante’. 👁️🤔👩‍🔬

“Some forms of intelligence — specifically the intelligence needed to fully escape the spectre of infinite loops in an open-ended world — rely on the capabilities that come with a conscious mind deeply embedded in the flow of time.” Anil Seth 🧠⏳

“The 200-year history of Italy’s psychiatric hospitals is a rich tapestry that illuminates how the human psyche was understood in the country between the 18th and 20th centuries. San Servolo and San Clemente crystallize the most salient bits of this history.”

Giulia Marchetti spiega bene il problema dell’antibiotico-resistenza. Se a scuola si insegnasse salute pubblica come si fa ecologia, forse avremmo meno farmascettici, e quelli rimasti avrebbero sposato una causa giusta e migliore dell’antivaccinismo 💊💉🥼 youtube.com/live/z2uML9qia…

There’s a 2024 study on this👇“Even if correctness increases with scale (...) we see a large increase in the proportion of errors, with models (…) increasingly giving a non-avoidant answer when they do not know, consequently failing proportionally more.” nature.com/articles/s4158…

GPT-5 and Claude Sonnet 4, respectively. Of course, I can’t answer Gary’s question. But if a person did this, we would say they don’t know what the labels mean or how a bike works. Semantics and world knowledge.

Mind as system mapped— AI links thought, brain, behavior, Yet truth hides beneath. AIモデル 人の認知を 模倣する #論文575 #ScienceHaiku

The “AI is flawed, but so are we” meme is spreading. It’s a kind of ‘tu quoque’ fallacy. It’s designed to defuse criticism, to make current AI systems look more acceptable in spite of their flaws (or even because of them, as empirically better models of the mind). No, thanks. 🫷

‘Machine language as somniloquy: How the neuroscience of sleep illuminates generative AI’ — New quick paper to appear in THINK, exploring the idea that sleep talk and AI-generated language unfold in cognitive conditions with similar restrictions 🧠🤖😴 lingbuzz.net/lingbuzz/009303

كتابي "علم اللغة العصبي" متاح الآن مجاناً باللغة العربية! شكراً للمترجمين الرائعين الذين جعلوا هذا ممكناً. أتمنى أن يصل إلى قراء جدد ويساهم في بحوث علم اللغة العصبي في العالم العربي. #علم_اللغة_العصبي #العربية #ترجمة #Neurolinguistics #Arabic #translation hindawi.org/books/90509028/

«Neural integration is predominantly yoked to absolute time throughout both primary and non-primary auditory cortex, with little change in structure yoking between primary and non-primary regions (...) underlying computations are not explicitly aligned to sound structures.» 😮👏

True, and now ‘tu quoque’ fallacies pile up in the comments: “Ah, but then people don’t reason either”, “What do neurons know?”... That’s not a race between people and machines: no one’s keeping score. The point is that AI that’s as bad as we are or worse is not AI worth having.

«(...) all terms — cognitive, computationalist and mechanistic — are not making claims about what the system is; rather, they are each a statement of a proposed protocol for effectively interacting with the system.» Michael Levin Noema Magazine 🤔💡 noemamag.com/living-things-…

In Italia (ma non solo) si fa ancora troppa fatica ad accettare che l’antibiotico resistenza sia un problema e che l’evoluzione per selezione naturale sia un fatto. Le due cose sono legate, come spiega bene Piero Angela qui👇#SuperQuark SuperQuarkRai youtu.be/QGNGbUTQdow?fe…

This is quite exceptional for little Trondheim. There was enough Picasso that I could mansplain my daughter on what deconstructed faces in portraits do to your brain, and she could educate me on how he couldn’t help but sexualize women’s bodies. We both learned something. #PoMo

This is a lovely paper, also pedagogically, and the points of contact are fairly precise. But I wonder, pooling the arguments out there, are LMs compatible with the main research programs in linguistics (formal semantics, usage-based theories etc.), just in different ways? 🤔💭🤷‍♂️

«The uneasiness we feel about the idea of having two or even multiple subjective states may well have been what led us to our discovery (...) of the “interpreter,” the special device in our left brain that gives our actions one narrative and the sense that we have but one mind.»

Research institutes have become so risk-averse that they often hire scientists in the top spots that would do and are doing great work anyway. It’s zero-sum talent capture. These positions could be opportunities to make wonderful science happen that would not exist otherwise.👩‍🔬🍀