p-e-w

82 ms·

871.
by p-e-w 3y ago
That's because authority figures don't actually mean it when they tell people to "always think critically". What they really mean is "think critically when others tell you something, but accept as gospel everything
872.
by p-e-w 3y ago
> A LM doesn't understand "truthfulness". It has no concept of a sequence being true or not, only of a sequence being probable. I claim that the human brain doesn't understand "truthfulness" either. It merel
873.
by p-e-w 3y ago
> paranoid AI risk cultists There is broad consensus among experts that a hypothetical strong AI would be a threat, and potentially an existential threat, to humanity. While not everyone agrees on details like timeline and alignment issu
874.
by p-e-w 3y ago
It's not just physics. Imagine you had told Gene Cernan, when he returned from the Moon in 1972, that no humans would leave Earth's orbit for the next 50 years. I'm sure he would have concluded that there must have been a g
875.
by p-e-w 3y ago
The Enlightenment wasn't limited to scholars and Kant didn't just encourage "experts" to dare to use their own reason – he encouraged everyone to do so. What you're describing isn't Enlightenment philosophy, it
876.
by p-e-w 3y ago
> I would say that today it's almost too easy to be allowed to bring up your own theories And there it is. Too easy. If only it weren't quite so easy, right? Then those who actually are "in the know" wouldn't h
877.
by p-e-w 3y ago
I realized a while ago that today's science and technology culture is essentially an anti-Enlightenment movement. The motto of Enlightenment philosophy was "dare to use your own reason"[1]. The mantra of contemporary science&
878.
by p-e-w 3y ago
I actually agree with you on that. Eugenics, genetic modification of embryos, transhumanism, radical social policies, and many related topics are likewise taboo, and most people wouldn't dare to even mention such ideas in polite comp
879.
by p-e-w 3y ago
> Let's get BCI -- the end-all, be-all of humanity -- properly off to the races. Invasively or not, get these thoughts out of the rotting confines of our skulls. For what (ultimate) purpose? What's the end goal here? The brain
880.
by p-e-w 3y ago
What's on social media is memes vaguely referencing that stuff, and cranks congratulating each other for doing it, usually in a "New Age" type context. That's a far cry from the scientific, serious, mainstream approach t
881.
by p-e-w 3y ago
> That city is overloaded with meditation, drugs, mysticism Overloaded with the pretense of it more likely, for the benefit of tourists who go there in search of a quick pseudo-mystical high. > As these concepts became popular in the
882.
by p-e-w 3y ago
Then why is there no serious discussion about it to be found anywhere? All I see is bland self-help books and an occasional vague article in a psych journal. Where are the meditation groups that aren't beholden to some religion or cu
883.
by p-e-w 3y ago
This phenomenon goes far beyond drugs. Contemporary society has explicit or implicit taboos on anything related to expanding or altering human consciousness, to the extent that such topics have essentially vanished from both the mainstrea
884.
by p-e-w 3y ago
> I guarantee you most people in your industry are on it all the time. I guarantee you that they aren't. This is the standard occupational bias of someone who interacts with a highly specific subset of the population all day, and th
885.
by p-e-w 3y ago
How could they be trapped "near" the surface? That would require the sub to maintain buoyancy precisely, which seems unlikely without active systems.
886.
by p-e-w 3y ago
Because "stupid" and "intelligent" are just words, and they cannot hope to capture the rich and multi-dimensional gamut of the human intellect.
887.
by p-e-w 3y ago
> if someone has been around for 1,000 years and yet is indulgently stupid then maybe I have some right to be angry with them Alternative interpretation: If someone has managed to be around for 1,000 years and you think they are stupid,
888.
by p-e-w 3y ago
> adblockers got popular, browsers start shipping with default blockers No major browser has ever shipped with an ad blocker enabled by default. Firefox blocks trackers, and Brave is not a "major" browser under any reasonable d
889.
by p-e-w 3y ago
I've occasionally encountered projects using Nix, and I've casually browsed the Nix and NixOS websites, but I still don't have a clear idea of what Nix is. Is it a package manager? A build system? An operating system? A con
890.
by p-e-w 3y ago
Unless you are also building your entire hardware from scratch, including the CPU, and writing or auditing all firmware and device drivers, "zero trust" is a fantasy. Zero trust means verifying everything. Not only has no living p
891.
by p-e-w 3y ago
> I do not believe that end-to-end encryption means anything at all when the network and the client are the same entity. That's textbook black-and-white thinking, and it's bullshit. I agree that network and client being control
892.
by p-e-w 3y ago
10+ years, considering how Btrfs has played out. Btrfs was merged in 2009, but didn't gain wide acceptance until quite recently. Among the biggest distros, only Fedora uses it as default, and RHEL has actually dropped support. Even tod
893.
by p-e-w 3y ago
Culture. Gun violence is a function of gun ownership, gun culture, and overall culture. Nobody who has visited both Switzerland and the US can fail to notice the huge cultural differences, and how they relate to interpersonal violence. In t
894.
by p-e-w 3y ago
I share the frustration with the major online news portals, and have in fact built my own portal powered by Wikipedia[1]. But eventually I realized that my biggest gripe with news today isn't the presentation but the content. And I&#x2
895.
by p-e-w 3y ago
> If you're banned from a popular instance you're not banned from the platform as a whole. The most popular instances are the platform. Yes, you can run your own instance, with only yourself as a user. Unless others choose to
896.
by p-e-w 3y ago
Which is exactly why the Fediverse doesn't solve anything. It's the most powerful trampling over everyone else – just like on Reddit, Facebook, and Twitter. The Fediverse is yet another middleman brokering communication between in
897.
by p-e-w 3y ago
> The fediverse is just random scattered kingdoms having fragile connections. Indeed. And each "kingdom" has the exact same problem with power centralization that the Fediverse supposedly solves. And the more popular an instanc
898.
by p-e-w 3y ago
> People will literally create blacklists of sites, and if you don't follow the blacklist you'll get added to it. This is why the Fediverse cannot work. More precisely, it can work, but only in the same way as the thing it tr
899.
by p-e-w 3y ago
> Can you link me to where I can submit bounties to a spy agency No. I have no idea. But it would clearly be in the interest of such institutions to have such programs, so common sense says they do. I'm sure that people who are acti
900.
by p-e-w 3y ago
> You can't just post these things on eBay and hope for the best. Of course not. You start a "security consulting company" and then apply to be a contractor. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of companies like that. An

More ›