Vecr

34 ms·

601.
by Vecr 3y ago
A lot more impressive than I expected, with a combination of Kevlar/Carbon black filled UHMWPE/PEEK and radiation shielding it might actually be able to do the work asked of it.
602.
by Vecr 3y ago
I can't remember Gavin's name, but Vitalik is Vitalik Buterin.
603.
by Vecr 3y ago
You can reverse engineer probabilities (or P-words if you don't want to call them that) from the bets you would make. Obviously there's a problem there if everyone's dead, but they don't have to be literal bets. Someone
604.
by Vecr 3y ago
Guy who has Bayes' theorem as his column description is a fan of propensity? What's going on? It's still there, I checked. "P(A|B) = [P(A)*P(B|A)]/P(B), all the rest is commentary." How many non-Jews get the &q
605.
by Vecr 3y ago
It's not a crime against humanity. "Crimes against humanity" are actually very specific things, if you consider them real at all and not made up and enforced post hoc. General considerations of property rights let you go to m
606.
by Vecr 3y ago
No, I mean even if you had (perfect, non-approximated) Solomonoff induction, you could only generate probabilities for computable "theories" (programs that predict all your past and future input), but I suppose it's possible
607.
by Vecr 3y ago
It's arguable that there's no such thing as a probability measure over the reals, because Solomonoff induction only works over computable programs, and the reals (in the sense needed) are not computable.
608.
by Vecr 3y ago
Sure, those infinities. I meant the huge stack of new ones that Cantor started on in his book. What's Aleph 1 actually good for?
609.
by Vecr 3y ago
AMD lets you do that, and it's probably recommended in some cases. They don't force you to (except in some laptops?) because would give the user less freedom and because it would leave performance on the table. It does mean that t
610.
by Vecr 3y ago
Infinities simplify various things in math. Weird multi-sized infinities though don't appear very useful.
611.
by Vecr 3y ago
Well, for some people it's more like "Everybody's a free-speech absolutist until the speech causes them ~~to get punched in the face~~ shoot someone in the face for trying to punch them in the face." And even then some o
612.
by Vecr 3y ago
Yes, I know what you're going to say, "nobody" does not mean literally nobody, but in this case there are (somewhat) prominent views that do literally mean no speech should be banned.
613.
by Vecr 3y ago
You've got to multiply that with the probabilities in various somewhat complicated ways, but a simple approximation is to multiply the probability of death by a certain kind of cancer by the expected loss of dying of that cancer at the
614.
by Vecr 3y ago
Well, you hope you don't feel anything... Are they using propofol alone? Has more research been done on how good of a painkiller it is vs a memory eraser?
615.
by Vecr 3y ago
You are right, I'm wrong. I thought he had something in there for that anyway, but apparently not. Still, you're just on the other side of the Amdahl’s law problems, so you better hope no one is depending on you .
616.
by Vecr 3y ago
As soon as possible, because you don't know you'll last that long. You do need to use resources wisely though.
617.
by Vecr 3y ago
Because you never write gotos? Many embedded and kernel programmers still do. I think it makes sense in general.
618.
by Vecr 3y ago
There's no suffering issue, there's zero point in turning it off. The only thing you'd do is re-allocate DSN resources at some point if someone else really needs them.
619.
by Vecr 3y ago
Similar to the XKCD, Gwern says no: https://gwern.net/hyperbolic-time-chamber
620.
by Vecr 3y ago
I don't know about "schizophrenic", but Nature has published various weird things in their sub-journals.
621.
by Vecr 3y ago
No they haven't, a classical Turing machine has at most an exponential slowdown compared to a quantum Turing machine.
622.
by Vecr 3y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann%E2%80%93Morgenster... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_inference Maybe everything&#x2
623.
by Vecr 3y ago
> but I guess I'm not following how this question is related to the article? They're not claiming to use some kind of supernatural means to predict the future. Probably because they don't think it exists.
624.
by Vecr 3y ago
Closer to 1/5000 for the vaccine thing, depending on the sub-population.
625.
by Vecr 3y ago
Other than most of it, including the "wind up" part. And, how messed up does a plant's genome need to be to prevent you from easily sequencing the whole thing? How do the companies in the book keep a base sequence for the unm
626.
by Vecr 3y ago
There's good evidence for it, inferred temperature of the early universe included. Obviously not perfect evidence, but even if you assume "tired light", it's another thing all together to come up with a new version of th
627.
by Vecr 3y ago
That's the "big crunch" theory. It's been pretty dubious for quite a while now though.
628.
by Vecr 3y ago
Why? Sure, maybe a better number to give is "somewhere around 20", but it's difficult to tell how the "true number" could be over 100 or even 50.
629.
by Vecr 3y ago
It's the finger problem, you've got to get the number, size, angle, position, etc. right every single time or people can tell very fast. It's not like tree branches where people won't notice if the splitting positions ar
630.
by Vecr 3y ago
It's a Northern Ireland thing, because the land border to the rest of Ireland is also a land border to the EU. The UK's food standards are fine, last time I checked the overall food security (welfare, etc) and food standards were

More ›