NateEag

31 ms·

1. 451.▲
   by NateEag 4y ago

   See e.g. the British transition from Julian to Gregorian calendars, in which eleven days of September 1752 were not observed in England: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calendar_(New_Style)_Act_175... IIRC, that event
2. 452.▲
   by NateEag 4y ago

   A combination of pragmatism and hubris. pragmatism: our best current theories about the universe suggest that the speed of light is a constant. Until someone proposes a theory with more explanatory power that suggests otherwise, we might as
3. 453.▲
   by NateEag 4y ago

   What was the prompt for that image? What wrote the prompt?
4. 454.▲
   by NateEag 4y ago

   Basically, yeah, but with the difference that these sysadmins are generalizing and abstracting the patterns they've learned over years. I personally think of "devops" not quite so much as being about "dev" and &quot
5. 455.▲
   by NateEag 4y ago

   > They wield power not available to individual humans. They achieve things individual humans can’t. They get people to sacrifice themselves (up to a literal karoshi) for company’s interests. Do these have something to do with intelligenc
6. 456.▲
   by NateEag 4y ago

   Do not miss the beautiful, heart-breaking song "Starlight" about the incidents: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ap9cGMJqwuQ
7. 457.▲
   by NateEag 4y ago

   I personally think an honest look at human ability to estimate risk shows that as a species we're bad enough at it that utilitarianism is intractable. I may, of course, suffer from the very problem you're describing.
8. 458.▲
   by NateEag 4y ago

   Because in my experience these systems act dumber than most individual humans manage to. They function much more like a drunk, demented DNN optimizing for some unknown set of variables than like a human using its intelligence to solve probl
9. 459.▲
   by NateEag 4y ago

   Thank you for so clearly and simply articulating the fundamental problem of utilitarianism.
10. 460.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    Whether his behavior at the pub was immoral is unrelated to whether his reasoning on another moral question is correct.
11. 461.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    Oh, okay. I personally wouldn't have called those things "intelligences" - more like clashes of unintended perverse incentives and ignored negative externalities. That said, I didn't think you were talking about a hypoth
12. 462.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    They were likely pissed because they were afraid it would make them look bad to management - "How come no one on the backend team could find time to build this, but one front-end guy managed to despite his regular workload?" It&#x
13. 463.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    Heh - this sounds kind of like theism. :)
14. 464.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    I've known many people who lean conservative to one extent or another. I think many of them have demonstrated a good deal of wisdom, often by not trusting too much in the conclusions of their all-too-fallible intellects. I can't s
15. 465.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    I somehow went thirty-eight years in this life without realizing there was actually a double meaning behind that phrase. Thank you for enlightening me.
16. 466.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    So science is a method of constructing falsifiable hypotheses about how to predict phenomena reliably? Any response to my other questions?
17. 467.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    FWIW, the Codidact project has been plugging away at building an OSS replacement for SE: https://www.codidact.org/
18. 468.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    With the crucial difference that "serverless" is proprietary and uses different APIs, so you can't just go to whatever hosting company you want.
19. 469.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    s/moot/not/
20. 470.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    Thanks for writing accent! It makes my life just a little bit better, and I'm grateful for it.
21. 471.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    An Amish farm not too far from me (and not too far from Elizabethtown College, where TFA is from) has a solar panel on the barn roof. Noticed it while driving past about a month ago. I don't know what sect the family belongs to, but a
22. 472.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    > There is no source of knowledge, method or tool that surpasses science in epistemological authority. That does not mean it gets us to a total and absolute truth, it just means it's the least-bad way possible of knowing things. Wha
23. 473.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    Thank you for sharing this. It's an interesting thought and I found it helpful.
24. 474.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    Some certainly do. There was an ex-Amish programmer at my current employer's, a few years before I started.
25. 475.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    > Computers don’t arise randomly (without annoying semantic arguments). If you believe the human brain's processes are computable, and you believe evolution is a random process, then you believe that computers arise randomly. Is tha
26. 476.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    The target may believe one thing in the abstract, but find it hard to hold onto that in the face of unrelenting horrific pain. The torturer has no reason to divulge anything at all to you, let alone useful information like "we're
27. 477.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    I think you're right. Once a target has shown that they have hidden something at a lower level, which only they were able to demonstrate existed, the attacker knows the target has prepared an in-depth plausibly-deniable defense. They w
28. 478.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    That sounds accurate. My point is that if you're being subjected to the rubber-hose treatment, nothing's going to get you out of it. Any actor who will start down that path will likely take it all the way to the finish, extracting
29. 479.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    When the target is dead. There is no actual safety from nation-states or other sufficiently-resourced attackers.
30. 480.▲
    by NateEag 4y ago

    I have seen the word "sapient" used to delineate the ways in which humans seem to differ from most animals.