digging

58 ms·

901.
by digging 3y ago
I didn't say every living thing became technologically advanced, but that life on earth did. It only takes one species for a planet like our to be screaming at full volume in every direction simultaneously.
902.
by digging 3y ago
> Digitization is one direction but I think augmentation is perhaps a more likely one. Or a first one. First seems likely, but as a permanent alternative I don't know why a species would eschew lightspeed transportation and effortle
903.
by digging 3y ago
> I don't recall it expanding at light-speed It may have been slower, but I'm not sure why it would be or what the mechanism was. Regardless, it had the effect of consuming the entire system didn't it? As you say, it was d
904.
by digging 3y ago
That's not an answer to my question, it's just different a wrong assertion. To answer your new point, Life has never once failed to become self-aware and capable of space travel in the entire history of the universe, as far as we
905.
by digging 3y ago
Your assertion is wrong (because you're 100% confident about something not knowable), but what's worse, it doesn't even address the question of "Why no aliens?". If alien intelligences were abundant but just "r
906.
by digging 3y ago
You seriously don't understand the difference between finding alien microbes vs finding aliens that can build guns and point them at us? Or for that matter, aliens that can actively teach us new things. I just... no, I don't think
907.
by digging 3y ago
In the book, the entire system would be sacrificed. It's many orders of magnitude easier to target a star than a planet, and the tool used permanently altered spacetime itself in a sphere expanding at lightspeed (similar to vacuum deca
908.
by digging 3y ago
> If resource are scarce, destroying stars and planets seems counterproductive. Resources aren't scarce, they're just finite. If there are 19 uninhabited systems for every inhabited one, it may seam reasonable to obliterate 5%
909.
by digging 3y ago
Interesting beginning of an article, but it's paywalled after part 1.
910.
by digging 3y ago
I think you're going to need to explain your position a little better.
911.
by digging 3y ago
> unless AI augments our brains somehow Frankly, the more I think about AI, the less sense it makes to me that biological, single-body humans have any place in the future. As soon as we can digitize our minds, why wouldn't people be
912.
by digging 3y ago
> shaped and constrained by us humans rather than developing free based on the laws of the universe This logic doesn't hold. Humans are part of the universe and obey all its laws. It's arbitrary to say bacteria and bonobos and
913.
by digging 3y ago
> Intelligence emerges as you are trying to survive longer. That's not a given - I don't even know if it's true. The longest-lived species are not very intelligent, relative to humans. Intelligence is a tool that may or ma
914.
by digging 3y ago
I see. Then, if demand is the rate of... demand (?), it is analogous to speed and it's not appropriate to say "slowing down", as you say.
915.
by digging 3y ago
I think you misread my comment. Demand is not analogous to speed, it's analogous to position. I was asking how you were relating demand to speed, in your comment. It may be easier if you start using "rate-of-change of demand&q
916.
by digging 3y ago
> It’s been proven over and over that less people live in poverty and starvation than any other era of human history. To Claim otherwise is not supported by the data. Great, but that's not a claim either of us made. > However we
917.
by digging 3y ago
> “Home” in that context is back where you came from, I.e. the back button. ...No, that would be "back", not "home". Those aren't interchangeable terms unless you are coming from a (or your browser's) home
918.
by digging 3y ago
If rate-of-change of demand is acceleration, that means demand itself is speed and is measuring a rate-of-change. What is demand measuring the rate of change of? Acceleration decreased such that it is negative. Negative acceleration is &q
919.
by digging 3y ago
> Increasing less fast is not the definition of slowing down Increasing position less fast is the definition of slowing down, as I said. Increasing speed less fast is, of course, not the definition of slowing down, it's decelerati
920.
by digging 3y ago
That's mostly true, but there are some ergs (regions entirely buried in sand) in US deserts, and ergs are also a relatively small part of the Sahara.
921.
by digging 3y ago
So the rate of change of demand is decreasing. Decreasing rate of change is the definition slowing down. Although I agree that most people probably misinterpret the phrase as you say. (It seems other replies have had that interpretation.)
922.
by digging 3y ago
I understand (and endorse) simplicity of design, but that page doesn't even have a link back to the home page. They've gone too far past accessibility into creating a less-accessible page...
923.
by digging 3y ago
Christianity gave us a world without heroism and virtue? Christianity stopped us from destroying the weak and the other? It's weird then how the western Christian world has retained all of those negative traits for almost two millennia
924.
by digging 3y ago
Yes, obviously. It's meant to be consumed in context of knowing what good is. If you're lacking that context, don't use that single quote to guide your life choices.
925.
by digging 3y ago
> a cruel and bitter world — something many of us do not live in today. I really don't agree with that. We've solved many problems of the past, we've created many comforts, and we've created many accommodating structu
926.
by digging 3y ago
One doesn't have to be rich to be unemployed for a while, just have decent savings. I also don't think "social status" is the concern holding most people back from unemployment, but rather "the need for money to pay
927.
by digging 3y ago
They do actually acknowledge internal state, > Status limbo is a state of ambiguity and future uncertainty about your status, both in your estimation and as perceived by others. But overall I agree that the article doesn't have a go
928.
by digging 3y ago
> One anecdote I remember is that Hercules was potentially derived from stories of a Phoenician hero who walked along the shore and discovered that the molluscs that crushed beneath his feet created a purple hue. He was renowned for turn
929.
by digging 3y ago
I imagine you don't expect a serious answer to that anyway, but to be clear: anyone talking about AI timelines seriously would not be expressing so much certainty because it's not possible to know AI timelines with certainty ri
930.
by digging 3y ago
> It's about using your environment to gain an evolutionary advantage. I don't think that's right either (it sounds like a description of adaptation), and I don't think your description of LLMs is fair, even though I&

More ›