jibiki

33 ms·

271.
by jibiki 18y ago
(Yes, that's the joke...)
272.
by jibiki 18y ago
A famous quote comes to mind... http://bash.org/?4780
273.
by jibiki 18y ago
The last part is probably a Tara Ploughman quote.
274.
by jibiki 18y ago
I think we could hope that AI advance will be gradual, so that an eye-opening crisis with non-friendly AI occurs before truly strong AI develops.
275.
by jibiki 18y ago
Hmm, unless I'm going crazy here, we get the differential equation x'' = -(x^-2) x = (kt)^(2/3)(with k = (2/9)^(-3/2), not that it matters) seems to be a solution? I guess that doesn't help with the singularity, but neither does loo
276.
by jibiki 18y ago
In my experience, Chinese people tend to be more critical in general (and correspondingly less affected by criticism.) Maybe that's a massive overgeneralization, but if you transplant this taxi driver to the United States, he would have th
277.
by jibiki 18y ago
>>> print "x: "+x Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> TypeError: cannot concatenate 'str' and 'int' objects To my mind, "x: "+x is ugly. Perl style "x: $x" makes
278.
by jibiki 18y ago
Yes, you can find the derivation here: http://groups.google.ca/group/sci.physics/msg/5312a801e0785e... ; ;)
279.
by jibiki 18y ago
But clearly some spooky inversion is allowed, e.g., writing: v = Lpi => v/i = Lp I don't even know what that means!
280.
by jibiki 18y ago
Is there a way to make the operator calculus rigorous? Because it's not at all clear which operations are allowed. If we naively used the sort of operations Heaviside used, we could conclude (where p is the operator d/dt) that: x = 1
281.
by jibiki 18y ago
(Insert standard comment about graphing calculators as a typical starting point.)
282.
by jibiki 18y ago
But other people clearly have a different opinion of what constitutes force. So we're back to the beginning. I would suggest using a different word, since your definition of "force" very much bends the standard English meaning. In partic
283.
by jibiki 18y ago
Haque doesn't accuse the bankers of fraud, just of "economically damaging actions." Reading that as "massive fraud" makes the article's point much clearer. (It's probably impossible to criminalize "economically damaging actions" in genera
284.
by jibiki 18y ago
Either way is correct. "Have defined" sounds a little more conventional, but it depends on context. If the simple past makes more sense to you, then you should use it. > Simple past is used when there is a specific time involved. For
285.
by jibiki 18y ago
No true Scotsman would own a cellphone! In all seriousness, "poor" to me does not mean homeless. In fact, there are many people above the poverty line who I consider poor (the so-called "working poor".) Obviously this is different for you
286.
by jibiki 18y ago
> People who start wars may claim that they are starting wars because of principle when they are really starting them because of expediency. This makes it very hard to evaluate whether "if you want war, work for justice" is a true state
287.
by jibiki 18y ago
I'm kind of ignorant about this subject. Are most wars started by moral disagreements?
288.
by jibiki 18y ago
Seems like the kind of thing that would be more fun to write than to read...
289.
by jibiki 18y ago
The article sources this statistic to an official EU document(?): http://ec.europa.eu/publications/booklets/eu_glance/44/en-3.... Look near the bottom of page 52... Edit: I can't seem to connect to the Japanese statistics page, but that t
290.
by jibiki 18y ago
"In some cases this works, in your example it doesn't as 'real intelligence' is undefined, yet we are expected to accept that this undefined and unmeasured form of intelligence correlates with IQ." So do you think (general) intelligence exi
291.
by jibiki 18y ago
The article is (obviously) a joke. But it raises an interesting point about computation (namely, it's a small miracle that practically computable problems are usually those with polynomial time solutions.)
292.
by jibiki 18y ago
Wow, I'd never seen the public domain Haiku: This document may be freely distributed with attribution.
293.
by jibiki 18y ago
The meaning is obvious to me, although I've never seen it before. What would be a good real word to use instead? ("Efficient", "effective", "harmonious" all seem a bit off. "High performance" almost makes sense, but it's not comparable,
294.
by jibiki 18y ago
In terms of carbon footprint, a lot depends on where the ethanol comes from. For instance, if you're getting it from corn grown in the US, then you are doing it wrong... (The wikipedia article is kind of awful, but it touches on the main c
295.
by jibiki 18y ago
I think people wouldn't down vote you if you made a genuine effort to defend your position. Lame excuses like "everyone else is doing it" and "it's not actually wrong" don't count.
296.
by jibiki 18y ago
Personally, the closest I could come up with was the pen/pin distinction (unless I concentrate on it, I pronounce both words the same way.) I'm pretty sure that fiat English is natural English for somebody, because any unnatural rules (lik
297.
by jibiki 18y ago
Could you give an example of a fiat rule that isn't natural for you, personally?
298.
by jibiki 18y ago
That's true, but I think the author was talking more about the rules of written English, which aren't always so available to your brain. For example, when I'm speaking, I never need to ask myself whether I mean "they're" or "their".
299.
by jibiki 18y ago
I can understand the argument that lawyers are paid out of proportion to their contribution to society. But I've never understood the people who claim that they literally contribute nothing. It's better to have laws than to not have them,
300.
by jibiki 18y ago
"Do they experiment and analyze and try out alternative procedures in some sort of planned sequence? The author of one important study finds that few of them seem to reason at all, and that reflective thought is not evoked. 'Instead, many o

More ›