Post #2458735

2026-05-12 21:53 UTC

@soc@club.endormis.cat @futurebird@sauropods.win @StarkRG@myside-yourside.net @Landa@graz.social @cabel@social.panic.com @anonymouspl@expressional.social Also, don’t fall into the trap of thinking that non-human language is just a bunch of other different sounds made by animals. I anticipate much more advanced ways of capturing, recognising and digitising language of not-humans, which might end up placing more emphasis on not-sounds, eg stance, position relative to things, timing, etc. This would still go into a tokenisation funnel the same way that a novel verbal language would be, for the trainings.

Replies (1)

@u0421793@toot.pikopublish.ing 2026-05-13 08:02

@soc@club.endormis.cat @futurebird@sauropods.win @StarkRG@myside-yourside.net @Landa@graz.social @cabel@social.panic.com @anonymouspl@expressional.social ultimately it’s all about the embeddings - does a particular ‘thing that happened’ have any meaning to other things that recognise that particular thing that happened. In a way it doesn’t have to be animals or plants or living things. Perhaps geological and weather and stellar events can be tokenised as a set of embeddings with weights and stuff, and this might reveal patterns which ‘mean something’ which otherwise are occluded because we just don’t ‘see’ the relationships. Is this language? maybe, but it’s not from life. Or maybe we should consider the sequences of variances of situations on our planet to be the communications of a planet that is ‘alive’ – it’s life, but not as we know it.

Open ##2474087