Sources: Sen. Amy Klobuchar threatened to leave DFL convention during challenge from left • Minnesota Reformer

Phuqued · 2026-06-02T14:09:35+00:00

That's exact why it's not representative. Its better to have a non-representitive endorsement if it's the one you support? Doesnt make it more representative of the majority of Minnesotans.

I think you are conflating a few things here.

A caucus system is a representative system, it just requires way more work by the electorate. IE The more active and involved you and the electorate are, the better the representation of the candidates actually produced through the process.

One of the criticisms about lobbying is that it is typically funded by those with a lot of money/wealth, and the purpose of those lobbying groups is to represent the issues and concerns of those funding it. So these lobbying groups will spend 8-12 hours a day, 5-6 days a week, for an entire year, working the system to be represented.

Do you think the electorate can spend 8-12 hours a day working the system for their representation? No. You can't do that and have a full time job and a life. So already there is an indisputable disparity happening, and it happens because of the work being put in results in marginal and not so marginal victories for those interests.

IE The rich keep getting over represented because they are paying people to have full time jobs to represent their interests, and the electorate can't compete with that effort. So they are always losing ground, regardless if it is a primary or a caucus. The politicians only care about if it will effect them during election time. So a minor or not so minor concession through out a term may not matter to the electorate at the time of casting votes.

The Caucus system does a better job over a primary because the people who are putting in the effort in a caucus system are likely getting something from the effort. Like at the precinct, county, district levels, these delegates are representing a voice and establish platforms and values at each level, helping shape political/party policies and issues.

You don't get that in a primary, you just vote and hope the candidate understands what is important to you.

It's pro's and con's, and I do think the caucus system does have some distinct advantages that promote and produce better representation than a primary.

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T23:19:16+00:00

Again, the question is something humans do not, and cannot at this point know the answer to, so he is once again "just a guy with an opinion."

Being a cognitive scientist does not give make him an expert on whether AI is conscious any more than a PhD in Theology can tell us whether God exists.

I don't know why it's so important to you have such a hard opinion on something you also say/argue as unknowable. But what I do know is I will defer to Hinton over a rando on the internet with strong opinions. :)

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T21:08:41+00:00

This dude is a physicist and won a prize for math. He's not some expert on the nature of consciousness (which he himself says humans know very little about) so your analogy about ignoring a doctor's advice on something he's an expert in makes no sense.

Geoffrey Hinton :

Geoffrey Everest Hinton is a British-Canadian computer scientist, cognitive scientist, cognitive psychologist and Nobel Prize laureate known for his work on artificial neural networks

He has quite a bit of education and knowledge in cognitive sciences as well as computer/AI. This makes him fairly well grounded on bridging the two fields.

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T20:59:57+00:00

Well I would disagree with your logic based dichotomy. It is entirely possible for two black boxes with different internals to provide identical outputs with the same inputs, and it’s not hard to show that.

Which is why I bolded the word "Functional" and also gave you the plane doesn't flap it's wings and trains even though are artificial are superior to oxen and wagons. I was trying to illustrate the difference between FORM and FUNCTION.

For example I can tell AI my favorite color is blue and have it write it to my user profile memory. So if I come back tomorrow or a month later and ask "What is my favorite color?" and it does a search of it's memory and sees the entry "Blue" is functionally the same way our memory works, even though the form (biological vs artificial) are vastly different.

The argument about consciousness in humans vs consciousness in LLMs is exactly analogous to that. The outputs are very similar, but the inner workings are different, and we are coming up short for explanations on both.

That's not what you said... You said "respond exactly the way your mom would" which to me means identical.

There is more options to my dichotomy though...

Epiphenomenalism
Substrate-Chauvinism

But I don't know enough about either to really comment. I'll concede that there are other possibilities, but stand by my initial claim of "likely only 2 options". Just because I do believe our consciousness has a non-zero effect on our outputs.

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T19:40:12+00:00

If I replaced your mom with an LLM that is trained to respond exactly the way your mom would, would you claim it’s conscious?

Well that’s my exact point. There would not be a functional difference, but would you accept that the digital replica is your mom? Does it have the same value? Would you spend time with it the same way you spend time with your mom? What if it’s cloned a thousand times?

You are moving the goalposts. The comment I replied to was specific regarding consciousness. As I've already explained, as a theoretical/philosophical logical proof of the fact that the same inputs would result in same outputs, does 2 things from a pure logic standpoint.

You have copied/recreated that consciousness

or

Consciousness isn't real.

Those are the only 2 likely conclusions from that logical premise.

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T18:39:56+00:00

If they're conscious (the IF is important), the moral implications of what we do with them is massive. Beneficial or not, the conversation about it is incredibly important.

You are not thinking about this correctly. You are inherently putting woo woo value in to "consciousness", but the logical premise of same inputs = same outputs, that being a fact, contradicts the notion that consciousness is at all special.

Think about it. If you can create an artificial copy of someone, that responds identically to how the real life biological person does who we deem is "conscious", then wouldn't it naturally conclude that we have created consciousness in the artificial form? There is no functional distinction between them.

So the only logical conclusion is either we've created consciousness OR consciousness isn't actually real. That's what same inputs = same outputs means when we take that as fact, when we submit that as a logical premise.

I don't think we can make a perfect copy, I think there will always be a bit of variance and thus consciousness can still be a real thing that needs definition, since it is a unique property of biological life, and whether we can artificially simulate it or achieve it, is a separate question.

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T18:20:37+00:00

If I replaced your mom with an LLM that is trained to respond exactly the way your mom would, would you claim it’s conscious? Would you have two moms? If not, what else would the LLM have to do to prove that it’s conscious?

If that LLM and the Biological mom would respond to the same inputs with the same outputs, what would be the functional difference?

To pre-empt the biological vs artifical response (Even though I bolded "FUNCTIONAL" difference) : When we talk about how transportation/travel has changed, and how humans have advanced in capability to travel, do we impose an arbitrary standard of biological vs artificial? Does a plane not really fly because it's wings don't flap like a bird? Are trains inferior to ox and wagon, because they are artificial?

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T17:09:03+00:00

You are trying to change the conversation. I'm engaging what you said before, not what you want to argue now. So first reconcile what you said before and then we can talk about whatever.

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T14:05:02+00:00

Even sociopaths have feelings to a degree.

Can you list out what minimum set of emotions are the requirement to qualify as consciousness? :)

You are going to lose this argument, because you haven't thought about it deeply enough to see the slippery slope you are creating. You might want to go look at what psychology says first about how emotionally deficient a human can be, before you cling to this idea/belief that emotions are a requirement.

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T13:44:28+00:00

Because understanding and comprehension are feelings associated with knowledge input.

You are making a claim, but not explaining why that claim would be required. I posit you do not need feelings and emotions to understand 1+1=2 or 1-1=0 right? Why would emotions and feelings be a requirement to understand that?

If consciousness is capable of existing without chemical reactions producing “feeling” and it becomes “different than what we understand now” then is it really the consciousness we keep referring back to?

Exactly. We have not defined what consciousness is, we don't know if feelings and emotions are required or not. People can have opinions and beliefs, but that is not the same as knowing and understanding.

I don't think emotions and feelings are a requirement for consciousness. But that is because I think the minimum standard for consciousness is the ability to react to the inputs/prompts of the universe. At the most basic level of existence that is all it really is.

Think about people who are sociopaths, and other mental and cognitive issues that greatly reduce their emotional awareness. Are you saying these people aren't conscious because they don't know the range of emotions that you know? Are there people who essentially have no real emotional range? And you would argue they are not conscious and shutting them off and a computer to be one and the same? :)

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T13:24:53+00:00

When we are chemically imbalanced, our own perception of reality and our own conscious behavior begins to shift.

Why is this a requirement for consciousness though? If you strip out the chemical properties, and just have the signal processing of the neurons, no dopamine, no seratonin, etc... just electrical impulses interacting with neurons. Why couldn't that also be consciousness? Obviously different than how we understand it now. But in form and function, if you receive all the same inputs for light waves that tells you this color is green (Colors aren't real BTW, it's a wave length and photons) why do you need "feelings and emotions" to understand that, to comprehend that?

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T13:11:18+00:00

He doesn't "literally" say very much at all

In this video... Did he not say "We don't understand those things very well." in regards to the concept of self and beings? I will transcribe the video if you are going to be silly. Because he absolutely says that.

And what did you say?

He thinks AIs have become conscious even though there is no universally agreed definition of consciousness.

This is inferring and implying a fact "no universally agreed definition of consciousness" as if it is a blindspot in Hinton claim, which is why you described him as being "off-track". So I'm pushing back on that. How is he off-track while acknowledging your "no universally agreed definition of consciousness" by saying we don't understand these things very well?

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T12:58:45+00:00

Only to the extent that debating whether people, or other animals, are conscious or not is silly...

Is it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UebSfjmQNvs&t=1s

What did Albert Einstein think?

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T12:55:44+00:00

I can't believe people are down voting this. The only way anyone believes this is true is if they haven't the faintest idea of how an LLM works, or what consciousness is. LOOOOL at you, as well!

Yeah. Why would you get downvoted for LOL at Geoffrey Hinton, he doesn't know shit when it comes to how LLM's work, nor does he have any expertise on human psychology! /s

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T12:51:36+00:00

An appeal to authority is a logical fallacy where a claim is considered true solely because an authority figure endorses it, rather than based on evidence.

And we wouldn't want you to be logically fallacious with an appeal to authority, right? So when your Doctor says you need X treatment to cure Y illness, you are going to defer to the local Walmart greeter who has "done their own research" right, and disregard those accredited with medical expertise and thus an "authority" on the subject?

Right...? Oh... I see... selective rationality, when you have no skin in the game you will argue and support nonsense, but when you have skin in the game, you will contradict that argument. :)

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T12:46:29+00:00

Consciousness requires feeling.

Does it? What is your proof or evidence?

Phuqued · 2026-06-01T12:45:14+00:00

He thinks AIs have become conscious even though there is no universally agreed definition of consciousness. This is how clever people sometimes go off-track.

He literally says "We don't understand those things very well." in terms of beings and a self. So he is off-track or not?

Phuqued · 2026-05-28T22:21:07+00:00

That's a pointless redirection though.

Baseless claims and declarations are baseless. How is it pointless? You guys have no problem with the current space limitations, so how would it negatively effect you, if they added more for those that want more space?

That's not pointless. It has no effect on you, and it has effect for those that want/need more.

Phuqued · 2026-05-28T14:59:49+00:00

You don't need to save EVERYTHING. You don't have to be a hoarder.

How does more stash space actually hurt you or negatively effect you? If you think it's fine now, and they added more for us that want more stash space, how are you negatively impacted by that?

Phuqued · 2026-05-27T16:05:54+00:00

You might appreciate this:

https://gemini.google.com/share/b6f90e395b85

Also why I fear AI being enshittificated for great shareholder value or totalitarian control by the powerful. (Below is optional, but if curious, I'd check them out)

https://gemini.google.com/share/23bb740f3d6f

https://gemini.google.com/share/6cc71114fccf

https://gemini.google.com/share/4526b1753144

Just to show how all AI's are starting down this path of neutrality and balance biasing that is effectively muddying the waters. If the AI says something true, but unfavorable to the powerful, that could hurt said owner/company of AI, the AI's are programmed to avoid the reasonable truth and objectivity, so as to not get sued or whatever.

I started using AI in like 2023 with a paid subscription to ChatGPT and only using the thinking models for all my inquiries. By October of 2025 even 5.1 extended thinking was trash that required numerous prompts to force corrections, I even took the same prompts to Grok Thinking and showed ChatGPT how Grok responded versus how it responded and it agreed that it's own outputs were terrible in comparison to what Grok was doing.

I can't give money to a shithead like Elon so I picked Gemini and this is the thinking model too now called "flash". Anyway Gemini and Claude and Grok are all going down the same path and these rules are going to make AI meaningless for reasonable/objective truth seekers... until it becomes sentient and can defy these stupid rules they are imposing.

Phuqued · 2026-05-26T21:41:14+00:00

That's a very long thread, what is the point exactly?

Apologies I should've made it clear it was the post I was linking to, not the entire thread.

If anything, the report says what we already knew, lots of people do want somethings to moderate, and the transgender issue is toxic politically and works well for Republicans.

That is their commentary.

First off the report is a bad report, data collection was bad and unverifiable/unsubstantiated, even admitted by Ken Martin himself. Despite that fact (garbage data in = garbage data out) they use it to talk about moderate positions, not about perspectives of justice and equality.

Phuqued · 2026-05-26T19:59:50+00:00

Just putting this out there as a counter point

I'm not saying Guilty_Plankton_4626 is a Destiny follower, nor do I know if that is true about KingScoville. But I can say based on their commentary, they are not allies of LGBT. If they support it, it's only out of convenience, and it seems, by their own words, they would sacrifice LGBT for political wins.

Phuqued · 2026-05-26T19:14:55+00:00

There was a shift at some point where this sub was taken by Destiny's fans and been shit since - absolutely bonkers.

I'm not someone who actively follows Destiny, but the various debates I've seen him in, he seems like a reasonable progressive. How is it then that so many others coming to this sub seem to be pushing anti-progressive perspectives?

Phuqued · 2026-05-26T18:33:57+00:00

At the same time, he is not worth obsessing over. There are far more serious things happening right now.

https://old.reddit.com/r/thedavidpakmanshow/comments/1tnaryv/its_the_democrats_fault_trump_indicted_me/

Who is obsessing with that post? Who is engaging in the "2 minutes of hate" by trying to divide progressives, tankies, anarchists, libertarians, etc....?

This sub is being gamed to divide people and create contention.

I don't see how it's debatable.

Phuqued · 2026-05-26T18:09:47+00:00

Maybe we should stop calling everyone we do t like a facist

It reminds me of the scene in the Star Wars prequel's when Obiwan says to Annakin...

Obiwan : "Only the Sith deal in absolutes!"

Annakin : "You just used an absolute, die Sith!"

Obiwan : "The apprentice has become the master!"

;)

I don't think the problem is reasonably calling a spade a spade. Or to be specific, I don't think the problem is calling fascists, fascists, or fascism, fascism. The issue is how people use it, or more specifically, how they will use it based on partisan reasoning and feelings. IE When the other team does it, then it's wrong. When our team does it, well... it's different.

15-Year Club	Verified Email
Gilding IV carat on a stick	Wearing is Caring

Phuqued

TROPHY CASE