bondarchuk

4 ms·

1.
by bondarchuk 10d ago
Copacetically?
2.
by bondarchuk 10d ago
It is really quite staggering how many commenters here seem to believe that the fact that there is no state carried from one chat session to the next proves that there can't be consciousness. It is obviously wrong if you think about it
3.
by bondarchuk 10d ago
The whole world is drowning in ads, and people have by and large done nothing about it. Revealed preference is that the vast majority of people support ads.
4.
by bondarchuk 10d ago
Interesting, thanks for the reply. So the difference is more in the feeling of ownership and control than the actual intensity of "seeing"..
5.
by bondarchuk 11d ago
I would like to know especially what is the perceived difference between normal imagination and hallucination. The way people with mental visualization explain it it sounds basically exactly what I always imagined hallucinations to be like.
6.
by bondarchuk 15d ago
In theory any device with a microphone and an internet connection can record everything and send it off to some remote server, but in practice there was really no evidence of this happening on any significant scale for a long time. It is ea
7.
by bondarchuk 16d ago
Uh sorry guys I phrased it weird I meant "complete absence of proof" more like.
8.
by bondarchuk 16d ago
Crazy that this is about to be normalized. Can't help but think the discourse of "they already record everything anyway" of the past couple years (even in the absence of complete proof) has played a part.
9.
by bondarchuk 16d ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Being_the_Right_Size "The most obvious differences between different animals are differences of size, but for some reason the zoologists have paid singularly little attention to th
10.
by bondarchuk 1mo ago
You could say e.g. Spinoza was a punk avant-la-lettre, he was a punk before the word "punk" even existed. I think GP is using it exactly opposite to the normal usage.
11.
by bondarchuk 1mo ago
We the people in the society who have the power to make laws through democratic means are the ones locking these books up.
12.
Tsang Tsou-Choi(en.wikipedia.org)
1 points by bondarchuk 2mo ago|0 comments
13.
by bondarchuk 2mo ago
> another analogous musing -- why did we start with main+tail rotor helicopters? In fact we started with autogyros. Also the Fw 61 ("the first successful, practical, and fully controllable helicopter" though I don't know
14.
by bondarchuk 2mo ago
Ah but you switched now from "I don't think people do this" to "people shouldn't do this". You're right about the latter but wrong about the former.
15.
by bondarchuk 2mo ago
Do you even need to hack a lab? Can't you just send an arbitrary sequence to some company and they'll do it for you?
16.
by bondarchuk 3mo ago
It's funny that if the LLMs had all given the same result each time (it sounds like) you would have considered it more valid, even though it might just be giving a single wrong answer more consistently.
17.
by bondarchuk 3mo ago
> Participants first abstained from coffee for two weeks before being reintroduced to either caffeinated or decaffeinated coffee in a blinded trial. So it could easily just be cessation of withdrawal symptoms.
18.
by bondarchuk 3mo ago
> That whole time, judicial warrants had always been legally and practically adequate for obtaining and reviewing evidence that was physically accessible. Certainly not. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secrecy_of_corr
19.
by bondarchuk 3mo ago
It's not that complicated. Minister wants to remove citizens privacy. Protester invades privacy of minister in response. On the one hand I agree that gps-tracking is not exactly the same as analyzing people's messages, on the othe
20.
by bondarchuk 3mo ago
He has to use a different method because obviously he does not have a backdoor into the prime minister's phone. The fact that "obviously wrong" invasive methods have to be used (now) to imitate something that the prime minist
21.
by bondarchuk 3mo ago
Think about why do governments want to ban encryption? Because they want to know everything about you all the time. Collecting information on someone such as their location is of the same order.
22.
by bondarchuk 3mo ago
Yeah it looks more like photocollage creatively photoshopped. Perspective is very weird in picture 3 too, very cubist.
23.
by bondarchuk 3mo ago
Postmodernism is a bit more "anything goes as long as it's good". Once you move beyond really basic rule-based criticisms like "it's not symmetric" or "there are competing masses" then you can ask &qu
24.
by bondarchuk 3mo ago
> Disclaimer: These same principles do not always apply to Modernist or even canonically Postmodern architecture. These principles are for the classical or traditional architecture most residential homes are modeled after. Seems like an
25.
by bondarchuk 3mo ago
I know you are right but it just sounds so dumb. In theory it should be possible to do a scan and then realize most things you find are likely not a problem and don't worry about them.
26.
by bondarchuk 4mo ago
Well yes, because video is a different medium.
27.
by bondarchuk 4mo ago
Fundamentally it seems like kindergartens showing youtube videos to kids should not be accepted by society.
28.
by bondarchuk 4mo ago
Likewise, appreciate it.
29.
by bondarchuk 4mo ago
So basically you're saying businesses have a right to sell peoples' attention. Of course for every seller there's a buyer but I do kinda see that how this framing would make a difference, ethically, for some.
30.
by bondarchuk 4mo ago
I don't know man. I just think somehow we'll manage. For example if a group of friends all feel a desperate need to find out about new products they could start a non-profit organization that will search out the new products and d

More ›