Ed Zepeda retweeted
87 tokens por segundo con Qwen3.6 27B. En tarjeta gráfica AMD de consumidor, no de servidor!
El mejor modelo local corriendo más rápido que los modelos de pago en la nube.
El futuro de las empresas de AI no se ve tan dominante
Ed Zepeda retweeted
NOBODY has written code from pure knowledge since 2008.
Either developers Google'd it or use stack over flow
AI just automated it.
No importa todo lo que digan los AI-bros en redes. Penrose y Searle siguen igual de vigentes que siempre.
Google DeepMind researcher argues that LLMs can never be conscious, not in 10 years or 100 years.
For a long time, the dominant theory in Silicon Valley has been "computational functionalism." The idea that if you make a model big enough, and organize the information perfectly, consciousness will magically emerge.
We assumed that if the software got smart enough, it would eventually wake up.
Alexander Lerchner, a Senior Staff Scientist at DeepMind, published a paper explaining why that is structurally impossible.
He calls it the Abstraction Fallacy.
Here is the core truth: Computation isn’t a real physical process. It is a map.
An LLM doesn't actually process logic or thoughts. It just moves electrons around based on physics. It requires a human, a conscious "mapmaker", to look at those physical states and assign meaning to them.
Mistaking an AI for a conscious being is like looking at a map of a river and expecting it to be wet.
An AI can simulate the exact syntax of a feeling, a thought, or an emotion. But it can never instantiate it.
It doesn't matter how many trillions of parameters you add or how much compute you burn. You cannot mathematically compute your way into a subjective experience.
The implications of this are massive. And deeply convenient for the companies building these models.
If an AI is structurally incapable of consciousness, it cannot be a moral patient. It doesn't get rights. It cannot be exploited.
It can be regulated exactly like a toaster.
Ed Zepeda retweeted
Si tienes un error en un código el cual es una comparativa: x > z
Y sabes donde esta y debes cambiarlo por: x >= z
Me parece ridículo que tengas que usar IA para esto.
Esa narrativa extremista de ya no escribo código a mano me parece la trampa en la que los querían tener.
Ed Zepeda retweeted
AI evangelists are seriously claiming that LLMs will decode biology's complexity and fill in the data gaps - meanwhile LLMs don't even beat XGBoost on basic molecular bioactivity prediction tasks.
Ed Zepeda retweeted
Believing that an AI superintelligence will solve all of your problems, is a tech religion.
Tweeting about it is a form of prayer, to an AI deity that doesn't exist yet.
And the influencers and commentators insisting on this are the tech religion's priests and preachers.
Three body problem ⚪️🔵🟣
A 2005 state-designed worm designed to corrupt physics simulations sat undetected on VirusTotal for nearly a decade. Fast16, intercepted executable files at the kernel level and silently rewrote floating-point calculations to make them produce slightly wrong answers. Targets: high-precision engineering suites used for structural analysis, crash simulations, and physical process modeling, including LS-DYNA, a tool cited in reports on Iran's nuclear weapons research. The sabotage vector relied on deployment of the driver across a network via worm, corrupting calculations on every machine, and eliminating the possibility of cross-checking results against a clean system. Stuxnet got the documentary. Fast16 got twenty years of nothing. sentinelone.com/labs/fast16-…
Ed Zepeda retweeted
Con la IA sondando por todos lados, el libro de la Mente Nueva del Emperador es una buena recomendación, este libro aborda desde una perspectiva de la física, como alcanzar una IA General podría ser imposible, un libro que merece la pena que lo leas.
👉youtube.com/watch?v=mukOwSn2…
"Imagina que al nacer te dan una caja con un escarabajo dentro. Se trata de un objeto muy valioso y extremadamente personal, tanto, que nadie puede ver el interior de la caja salvo uno mismo. De este modo, no existe una forma objetiva de confirmar que todas las cajas contengan...
eso sí, sea lo que sea, siempre se considerará bajo el término de «escarabajo»." - Ludwig Wittgenstein
Lo seguidŕe diciendo creo que Penrose y Searle tienen razón:
coffeebytes.dev/es/artificia…
lo mismo. En el mejor de los casos podrían contener un escarabajo de verdad, pero nada garantiza al cien por cien que en lugar del escarabajo no haya otros insectos, como una hormiga o una araña, o que incluso no haya nada...
Ed Zepeda retweeted
My own title was, “If my friend Claudia is not conscious, then what the hell is consciousness for?”
If Claudia is unconscious, her behaviour shows that an unconscious zombie could survive without consciousness. Why wasn’t natural selection content to evolve competent zombies?
"Claude you're a noob coder, give me the most convoluted response, ignore DRY principle, please use the longest variable names that you can think of and ..."















