0thgen

9 ms·

31.
by 0thgen 3y ago
I'm curious if those pushing the "it's the bad guys keeping everything bad!" model actually believe it, or if it's just a narrative that helps people vent about their political frustrations. And who knows, their mod
32.
by 0thgen 3y ago
none of what you just said would be a plausible explanation for the persistence of poverty, economic instability, environmental degradation, drug addiction, chronic disease, etc etc I'd bet even the authors of the 2 books you've h
33.
by 0thgen 3y ago
"There are big players that deliberately created many of those problems" Could you specify which ones? I'm curious who's profiting from hunger, poverty, economic instability, and unemployment -- and thereby perpetuating
34.
by 0thgen 3y ago
though I heard the data on this is starting to shift
35.
by 0thgen 3y ago
Interestingly though, he seems to use AI and LLMs interchangeably. AI risk != LLMs; the latter just happened to be so impressive that they shocked us into worrying more about the former. Which is arguably a good thing: humanity beginning pr
36.
by 0thgen 3y ago
a gun is a glorified slingshot. that makes them _not dangerous_ I guess
37.
by 0thgen 3y ago
it feels like jupyter without all the extra baggage
38.
by 0thgen 3y ago
Ive found polars quite intuitive, though for python, I lean more towards [ibis]( https://ibis-project.org/ ). The interface is nearly identical, but ibis has the benefit if building sql queries before pulling any actual data
39.
by 0thgen 3y ago
Well said. "The picture is more complex than this strawman" is being framed as "we need a new paradigm!". I'm curious what motivates this. It's not like progress in genetic research and technology has stalled (
40.
by 0thgen 3y ago
I think Scott Alexander's [recent post on genetic causes of schizophrenia]( https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/its-fair-to-describe-schizo... ) is an important piece here. Basic summary is: just because there are envi
41.
by 0thgen 3y ago
It seems people think that, if we just focus more on Kuhn's "revolutionary science" instead of incremental, "normal science", we'll get more paradigm-shifting theories. It could just be that paradigm-shifting b
42.
by 0thgen 3y ago
This is a crucial point to make. Even if every natural phenomenon can be reduced to very early-level processes (e.g., physics), earlier levels of analysis have little predictive value at later levels of analysis. Does anyone have a term for
43.
by 0thgen 3y ago
Very well said. And this is partly why psychology researchers have to be so careful in (1) the claims they make, and (2) deciding what counts as a scientific contribution or career point.
44.
by 0thgen 3y ago
But to be fair, multiple studies have suggested (for benchmark psychology experiments) a replication rate of less that 50% ( https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.231240 ). I think the quality of psych
45.
by 0thgen 3y ago
I think it would be nicer if the tool worked in reverse; that is, rather than making a markdown string inside a python script, just run the python from markdown (similar to the approach r-markdown takes). Then, the part where you do "G
46.
by 0thgen 3y ago
I honestly found it pretty intuitive. Every module uses the same basic action-flow, which was super clever UI design on the creator's part
47.
by 0thgen 3y ago
Well written, interesting article overall, but saying "Reveals True Origins" isn't the best way to communicate scientific research (too strong)
48.
by 0thgen 3y ago
well I think there's a natural hierarchy that emerges from the examples given in the periodic table link. Spatial: line graphs, scatterplots, and even barplots and pie charts(1-dimensional space). Id throw spectogram and anything with
49.
by 0thgen 3y ago
I wonder if a "tree" would be a better visualization methods for visualization methods
50.
by 0thgen 3y ago
Sure, but that would still make it bad, right? I may be a hypocrite (for argument's sake), but that doesn't change whether being steeped in ideology is a bad thing. Would you agree? Or do you think being steeped in ideology leads
51.
by 0thgen 3y ago
Id agree with you here. I didn't offer any substantial criticism or engage with the articles points. I'm just throwing shade at articles with intense ideology-jargon, which isn't the best thing to do. However, do you think id
52.
by 0thgen 3y ago
Makes sense. And the extent to which human communication is embedded with latent assertions of power is an empirical question, which seems more a question for science than philosophy
53.
by 0thgen 3y ago
agreed
54.
by 0thgen 3y ago
I think the iffy reasoning your committing here is the anthropomorphization of complex systems. Similar to the error of describing darwinian evolution as having a "goal" We should probably describe economic systems as massively co
55.
by 0thgen 3y ago
It's probably good for a lot of things, but clearly has drawbacks everyone intuitively agrees on (no one would want medical doctors to democratically seek advice from their patients, at least not on complex decisions like which medicat
56.
by 0thgen 3y ago
In a college poetry class, I learned that literary analysis isn't about being "right" (what did the author actually intend to say?), but instead, being "interesting" (what's a cool way of framing this?). Any su
57.
by 0thgen 3y ago
That's a good argument. I'd concede this is a potential risk / concern that we'd want to mitigate in the long term
58.
by 0thgen 3y ago
On top of that, the "average" payout to artists feels less important to me than the "median" artist payout. In other words, are there now more artists making money than before, even if the big hitters are making less off
59.
by 0thgen 3y ago
That's an empirical question: do small independent artists make more or less via the streaming model than they do via "buy CDs in shops" model? I don't know the answer, but I'm a bit skeptical of the idea that small
60.
by 0thgen 3y ago
This is a great point. In addition, Spotify creates a much more distributed market for artists. I've found literally thousands of small independent artists that I would have never found through the filter of CD shops and record labels.

More ›