istinetz

14 ms·

91.
by istinetz 4y ago
I am also confused, this seems like such a low hanging fruit - there's gotta be a downside.
92.
by istinetz 4y ago
cool, can you elaborate on the "trivial to achieve for anyone right now"? How is it trivial for me to become permanently black or whatever?
93.
by istinetz 4y ago
>Intelligence really doesn’t seem like the solution to any of our big problems. Why not? >I’ve heard this argument before (and probably made this argument at some point too), and it seems to boil down to thinking that people would agr
94.
by istinetz 4y ago
Can you elaborate on that? If it's "trivial to achieve for anyone right now", what does that mean? Is there any commercially available service?
95.
by istinetz 4y ago
It is coming, but too slowly. Everyone, including people itt, gesture vaguely towards "ethical considerations", without being able to specify what they are and how they outweigh the massive ethical benefits. >I expect that hu
96.
by istinetz 4y ago
>the "quotient" is a ranking mechanism for solving a certain type of paper puzzle, not an actual thing. Sure, except it strongly correlates with pretty much every single measure of fluid intelligence you can think of. And with
97.
by istinetz 4y ago
>Obviously the reconstruction isn't Obama. okay, so the model is not a perfect oracle? What's your point, then, if it's not about race?
98.
by istinetz 4y ago
I'm sure there is a attractiveness bias, but these studies barely find an effect. Seriously, look at figure 2. It's invisible to the eye without statistical tools. I'm really suspicious of this result.
99.
by istinetz 4y ago
I'm sorry, I thought >or they didn't build them. implied somebody else built the pyramids.
100.
by istinetz 4y ago
I appreciate the guts to seriously bring up ancient aliens on hackernews.
101.
by istinetz 4y ago
>people on HN should seriously question the competency of the average user here. Intentionally miss my point, misrepresent my claim, insult me in the last sentence. Nice.
102.
by istinetz 4y ago
You know what, this has rapidly degraded, so I'm gonna peace out. Tell your friends about the crazy evil racist you dunked on online.
103.
by istinetz 4y ago
I read the entire rationalwiki page on him, and followed the links to the primary sources, and I learned the following: a) whoever wrote the wiki really doesn't like him. A lot of the claims about him are a stretch. b) he does make s
104.
by istinetz 4y ago
half your comment is spent debunking my "claim". You cannot even discuss discussing taboo ideas. >The "years in the wilderness" is a feature not a bug! You just invented that. Never have I heard a suggestion that for
105.
by istinetz 4y ago
Hypothetically: a study finds racial differences in intelligence, or something equally taboo. Do you really believe an esteemed journal would actually publish it? Or would they find a reason to politely decline, such as "it's ou
106.
by istinetz 4y ago
Why not? It seems obvious to me that a UN committee will be under a lot of political pressure to bend the truth, where it is in conflict with politics. And I have seen many, many examples of committees bending the truth. Why is this one dif
107.
by istinetz 4y ago
>lack of precision you argue for gets people killed. Does it? Does it really? Does a single doctor that reads the Lancet not understand what a woman is? One (1) single doctor? How does that work, exactly? Does that hypothetical doctor re
108.
by istinetz 4y ago
Pretty much exactly my point, dunno why you're lecturing me. You can say "women". Or you can say the uglier, less clear, less concise "bodies with vaginas", which is more inclusive.
109.
by istinetz 4y ago
>Do you have any data that points to this? What data could I possibly have here? Even theoretically? What do you want me to give you? >It's not clear that there is a zero-sum game here Not necessarily exactly zero-sum, but it&#x2
110.
by istinetz 4y ago
>Using inclusive language is good. Is it, though? Using "inclusive" as a terminal value for writing means that other values, such as "conciseness" and "clarity" and "beauty" decrease, for the same
111.
by istinetz 5y ago
And what are the dazzlingly original ideas that the world does not let you work on?
112.
by istinetz 5y ago
I genuinely can't tell if this guy is trolling.
113.
by istinetz 5y ago
PSA, both of those are paywalled
114.
by istinetz 5y ago
The obvious one is neural networks :) This is a very interesting question, and even though I can't answer from personal experience, here is a paper[0] that listed the following: >Genetic Bee Colony (GBC) Algorithm This appears to co
115.
by istinetz 5y ago
>The logical conclusion is that THOSE ads don’t work, not that ads don’t work in general. Did you get to the second sentence of my two sentence post? Because it is literally exactly what you're saying.
116.
by istinetz 5y ago
This feels very wrong. ~40% of new small businesses will fail in 2 years. If 40% of all small businesses fail, that's completely different. If I model a small business surviving for 15 years on average, conditional on surviving the
117.
by istinetz 5y ago
> The basic premise is simple: company X spends money on ads, then turns those ads off and finds that the revenue does not change. Then the conclusion is made that ads don't work. On the surface, it seems like sound logic It is soun
118.
by istinetz 5y ago
>I just googled "best flash games of all time" and it's called IndestructoTank, was listed as #1 this is deleted >I just googled .... and it's called ..., was listed as #1 this is not deleted >best flash games o
119.
by istinetz 5y ago
>what you do reap is a very interconnected, multidisciplinary way of understanding the world, which comes to you not so much in the form of explicit knowledge but in the form of a very special “intuition”. What is the value of that, thou
120.
by istinetz 5y ago
The author has a very well articulated and defended fear. They're definitely not a crank, even if they've arrived at a wrong conclusion, which I doubt.

More ›