justanotherjoe

21 ms·

1. 241.▲
   by justanotherjoe 3y ago

   The creation of information is a divine thing, information lasts until humanity itself goes extinct. The very first concept created by our caveman ancestor we still use today. Copying is easy. Creating is hard. Even something as simple
2. 242.▲
   by justanotherjoe 3y ago

   My statement was about information content. It was really never about Jesus at all. My point is that it's really rare to have so many interesting or new things to say, and anyone who says interesting and novel things all the time for
3. 243.▲
   by justanotherjoe 3y ago

   That's my point though. He didn't need to say it again cause he wouldnt add anything to it.
4. 244.▲
   by justanotherjoe 3y ago

   im explaining it poorly. What i mean is that the principle is "if jesus didn't have that much to say,who is this guy that he talks for thousands of hours?"
5. 245.▲
   by justanotherjoe 3y ago

   Im no longer catholic, but i use Jesus as a comparison to thrse figures. It's what i call the jesus principle: "Would jesus have this many things to say?" Jesus was 'the son of god' and yet he didn't have tha
6. 246.▲
   by justanotherjoe 3y ago

   your example is intuitive and understandable. I just assumed that Wolfram was unto more 'radical' kind of expansion. Something more akin to 'seed' than 'building blocks'.
7. 247.▲
   by justanotherjoe 3y ago

   From my understanding it says that the laws of physics are merely expansion following some set of rules. Because there is no limit to the complexity that you can gain by expanding using some sort of expansion rules, and the rules of physic
8. 248.▲
   by justanotherjoe 3y ago

   the truth doesnt need to be defended cause the truth is no one, and it doesnt care to be defended. The one you should defend is common good. And truths as when they pertain to common good.
9. 249.▲
   by justanotherjoe 3y ago

   I sometimes think of a bigger version of this question. Would it be better if rennaisance and scientific revolution had come way later than it did. Maybe humans would have been more evolved and ready for the changes and can make better de
10. 250.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    Yeah information is different since once you find something out its often trivial to replicate and deploy it. The cost is coming up with the knowledge in the first place.
11. 251.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    this is embarassing. I didn't read the article. I'm sorry for the bad time people must have had reading my useless comment.
12. 252.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    This article came in a suspiciously close time frameas Timothy Cain's (Fallout dev) youtube video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ihX2e9dnYM&t=624s )
13. 253.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    Just because it inputs and outputs text embeddings, doesnt mean its all text in between. Inside, it doesnt work in units of texts. You wouldnt say a blind human is just a text pattern machine cause it inputs and outputs text. Theres noth
14. 254.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    exactly. It's not often your motivation thats the problem, but motivation cost. Being appreciated lowers motivation cost greatly. People like rewards. This is how people play gamea for thousands of hours. Cause the motivation co
15. 255.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    people is just starting to appreciate just how useful static formulas are. They are truly lightweight, condensed, and specialized form of knowledge that we take for granted.
16. 256.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    from a maximization point of view, it's clear that there is some kind of maximum point in human welfare graph. It doesnt go up and up and up forever. At some point, we'll reach (reached?) the maximum and furyher progress will lo
17. 257.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    Just because you don't find your life enhanced by something doesn't mean that something is useless... And of course we can live without it. I posit we can live quite a fulfilling life as a hunter gatherer in the kalahari. Anyway,
18. 258.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    Sure, you can put A, B, C, D side by side. But next time if you need to find D, you have to navigate A > B > C > D, with no other recourse. Often, you don't care about A, B, or C. Only D. And the benefit of A, B, C, and D
19. 259.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    There is a psychological study, where two group of people are asked to do some task for pay. Afterward they have to rate how engaging was the task they have to do. The group who are paid well reported that the work was boring. While the
20. 260.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    isn't it highly dependent on what is your one epoch of data? if there are a lot of repetitions of similar concepts in there then can you say it's learning from one example?
21. 261.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    It is true and it's worth reminding. Science is progressed by interpretation of data. And we have easy access to a behemoth that needs interpreting. AI winter shouldn't come anytime soon.
22. 262.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    thats what i thought as well. There should be another way to learn aside from / on top of backprop. How can you learn quickly with backprop? And what is thinking but real time learning.
23. 263.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    i think people will benefit from reminding themselves that they always have an option to do nothing, and sometimes its the best thing to do. This is not mere acceptance. It is understanding that there are other forces at play. Sometimes,
24. 264.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    You're right. Of course, getting excited on the media is fine. But people are acting as if their words can help protect something from someone, which is disconnected from reality. Things unfold either way, regardless of whether peopl
25. 265.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    I think there is justifiable view here that people these days are getting more and more addicted to making prediction. We predict everything but we forget most of it will be just a coin toss cause for every 1 factor we consider, 100 more a
26. 266.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    what people still dont get to this day is that everything is relative. You have to create both the object of wonder AND the baseline. Everything in lotr feels massive because frodo, the main character, is a mundane hobbit thrust into a
27. 267.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    You just say it. "Why does every movie." Doing that makes you categorize it as what a movie is. Simple, but subtle. It gives a certain level of legitimacy.
28. 268.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    shame is what got us casted out from eden
29. 269.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    I think people here underselling this idea a bit. I would like to see this concept played to the death: Where some lecture on a hard subject is structured such that it would focus on the surprising things first and focuses on them. Someti
30. 270.▲
    by justanotherjoe 3y ago

    Everytime people came up with a new curriculum or a new way to teach it seems to always backfire. Here's a thought, dont do anything. Let education be the farce that it is, save for some people who really believe in it, which are the