Machine Learning Street Talk / episode intelligence
Speakers in the public record
Claim mix
Evidence policy
Every row below preserves an exact excerpt. Identified speakers are linked; unresolved voices are labeled and excluded from people counts.
Claim ledger
14 published records
01 / evaluation
“We designed Gemini CLI to be your collaborative coding partner at the command line.”
02 / belief
“Maybe just jump in for a minute because I think actually it's not even specifying the structure.”
03 / belief
“You could if you wanted to simulate these kinds of things, you could read the DNA as the code that the priors that specify the structure. And, you know, I think that if if if you think of DNA as prescribing the structure of your generative model or your world model or your factor graph that will be fit for purpose and is learnable.”
04 / belief
“I think Vanja Weiss has written a paper about this and I think Aneel Seth speaks to this argument in a recent behavioral and brain science paper.”
05 / evaluation
“Oh, naughty. So, yeah, and I think, you know, people like Neil Seth make a very similar point quite earnestly, you know, that intelligence and and consciousness are completely orthogonal, that you're making agency and consciousness are completely orthogonal, and I would agree entirely.”
06 / disagreement
“I don't think you can do this on a on a Von Neumann architecture because the the Markov blankets of a Von Neumann architecture where you're reading and writing from memory make it very difficult for the memory to self organize.”
07 / recommendation
“You install that cause effect structure into your computer architecture, which is again the argument against von Neumann architectures, which is why 1 might, I think, look to all the processing in memory, neuromorphic photonics, possibly quantum computation, but think that's gone off the boil recently.”
08 / evaluation
“I've never been able to completely pin you down, professor Friston, because there have been so many interpretations of the free energy principle that that lean internalist and externalist and even, the the hybrid version, which Maxwell also wrote a paper about.”
09 / prediction
“At which point, I think you would you would find it very difficult to find something that was intelligent in the sense we're talking about because we have to have this recurrence, this solenoidal aspect in order to revisit the states.”
10 / prediction
“You mentioned consciousness which you shouldn't really do with me but if we stay here for long enough for more than 5 minutes, we will ultimately become completely entangled.”
11 / commitment
“You know, you you need to have that conditional independence to separate the thing from everything else or the self from from the non self. And everything's fine because the active states are hiding behind the sensory states, so the external states can't influence the active states, so that's tick 1, that's what we need.”
12 / evaluation
“Being able to communicate the free energy principle in a way that people find a useful and obvious sort of tool or method to apply could have, I think, gone better.”
13 / prediction
“I think that there is a Goldilocks regime, means that we can only exist at this scale with, as you say, this sort of yin yang, this admixture of dissipative dynamics and conservative dynamics.”
14 / prediction
“So what he would talk about there is not the synchronization between the inside and the outside or me and you and everything else like me and you, but entanglement. So the principle of unitarity is just basically well you can read the free energy principle as just the principle of unitarity which just means if we stay here for long enough, for more than 5 minutes, we will ultimately become completely entangled which means classically we will be engaged in a generalized synchrony.”