azan_

10 ms·

241.
by azan_ 5mo ago
If AI becomes good enough to easily produce maintainable and high quality software, then I really can't see how demand for software engineers would not plummet. Even lots of non-coding work that software engineers do, such as accuratel
242.
by azan_ 5mo ago
This list can't be serious. Is there single thing on this list that was genuinely killed by Apple, and not just outdated or moved to be a part of other software?
243.
by azan_ 5mo ago
Well, even looking at the list it's clear that there's huge difference between things killed by apple and by google. E.g. there's lots of hardware for which there's just no genuine market, e.g. iPod touch. I'm surpr
244.
by azan_ 5mo ago
> By that definition a Roomba is conscious. No, that doesn't make sense. > It's something you mistakenly believe is occurring because you aren't particularly rational. Absolutely not. It's you who ascribe magical p
245.
by azan_ 5mo ago
Well, typically people who make claims like yours are actual NPCs, just with opposite view. I'm sure you did not actually study models and find flaws with them but just vibe with people who say there's no climate change more. To d
246.
by azan_ 6mo ago
Man, I didn't know that elites face such struggles. I do not wish on anybody the experience of not being able to strike conversation with lowly peasants such as us.
247.
by azan_ 6mo ago
> This consciousness that you're sure you possess, but you can't measure, detect, define, or even really describe? But you can measure consciousness in humans, for example anesthesiologists do it all the time! Do you see differ
248.
by azan_ 6mo ago
> You grew up watching and seeing all the various illusions caused by how your brain works/malfunctions, but this is the one experience you're sure is the real deal? The one telling you that it's a scientific fact that you
249.
by azan_ 6mo ago
Isn't consciousness phenomenon that's literally derived from human experience? How can you have any definition of consciousness that says humans do not possess it, it's contradictory.
250.
by azan_ 6mo ago
Maybe you should've kept reading, your reply makes zero sense.
251.
by azan_ 6mo ago
Radiologists do it too.
252.
by azan_ 6mo ago
Cool article, wish it wasn’t AI written/edited.
253.
by azan_ 6mo ago
No problem, hit me up for an advice any other time you will be tempted to post stupid bullshit, glad I could help!
254.
by azan_ 6mo ago
I suggest you should drop the patronizing tone. People believe lots of things and a lot of them is completely bogus. That's why we need people in lab coats to evaluate them in systematic way.
255.
by azan_ 6mo ago
Well, you shouldn't smoke yet people do it. I think the article posits question whether we should in similar spirit.
256.
by azan_ 6mo ago
Someone has to hold smartphone and point it at you.
257.
by azan_ 6mo ago
I feel guilty for publishing in elsevier and paying for their “services”. By all means using scihub and libgen is morally superior position.
258.
by azan_ 6mo ago
Your comment is funny because it’s completely opposite - economics has generally great track record and fraudulent results typically do not survive for long. Citation cartels and paper mills exist in all disciplines.
259.
by azan_ 6mo ago
How should they be judged then? Any metric can be gamed. And if it will be kind of qualitative assessment then politics will be 10000x more important. The system is clearly broken but I’m not sure if alternative is not even worse.
260.
by azan_ 6mo ago
Much worse.
261.
by azan_ 6mo ago
> There's not much point in us each accusing the other of misrepresenting facts, as I'm about to do you. > So instead, how about trying to answer the question that capitalism can't, within the confines of capitalist inc
262.
by azan_ 6mo ago
> by raw number of people, non capitalist societies did this for more people. That's completely false. Please take your time to verify it, I hope that getting your facts straight will make you reconsider your position (and not get m
263.
by azan_ 6mo ago
Well of course the discussion is only about systems that actually exist, not ones that not only not exist, but also can't be imagined by anyone.
264.
by azan_ 6mo ago
> Looking around, the evidence doesn't seem to support this conclusion. It absolutely does if you look at facts and not "vibes". There are less people starving now than ever now and it's a giant, giant difference. We
265.
by azan_ 6mo ago
> Number theory had no practical applications until the development of public-key cryptography, but you cannot make funding decisions based on the future since it’s unknowable. You are completely missing the point. The point is that we s
266.
by azan_ 6mo ago
If solving even the biggest problems in pure maths is not worth it for you, then I guess we should stop all the pure maths research - researchers are getting paid much more than potential token spend, frequently for decades and they frequen
267.
by azan_ 6mo ago
Why do you think it's a waste of time and money? I really can't see it.
268.
by azan_ 6mo ago
> Capitalism already is a poor allocator of human effort, resources, and energy, why lock in on this specifically? It's absolutely best allocator of human effort there is. It has some problems but compared to alternatives it's
269.
by azan_ 6mo ago
So you can move the goal post again?
270.
by azan_ 6mo ago
But in this specific case AI actually explored the cave for you. Comparing it to car getting you to the cave is really bad comparison.

More ›