panda-giddiness

9 ms·

31.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
Well, then don't read it! While that's the most campy distillation of the premise, the writing is anything but. George R.R. Martin himself declared Tregillis "a major new talent".
32.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
Since the article doesn't mention it: Ian Tregillis (the first author of the paper and staff scientist at Los Alamos) also moonlights as a sci-fi/fantasy author. Personally I found The Milkweed Triptych a more compelling read th
33.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
> If it's 11:55, you would usually mentally subtract and conclude: the meeting is in 5 minutes. But the most probable estimate given the available information is actually 4'30"! Admittedly I'm being a bit pedantic, b
34.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
You might as well have written that mathematicians should stop doing mathematics. If every mathematician were to work full time on formalizing theorems in proof assistants, then no living mathematician would ever do original research again
35.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
> the big benefit is parallel computing at a massive scale The problem with this line of reasoning is that, even though a quantum system might have many possible states, we only observe a single one of those states at the time of measure
36.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
From the New York Times: "How Polarized Politics Led South Korea to a Plunge Into Martial Law" [1] > From the start [...] Mr. Yoon faced two obstacles. > The opposition Democratic Party held on to its majority in the Nati
37.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
You can, in fact, do that. It's called (aptly enough) the empirical Bayes method. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_Bayes_method
38.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
From the article (sorry for the bad link before; fixed below [1]): > The revenue from taxes and levies on road traffic amounts to around 50 billion euros annually. Around half of this is earmarked by law via the mineral oil tax, i.e. aro
39.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
Germany spends some 70 billion euros maintaining the road system, only about a third of which is offset by taxes on drivers [1]. If we accept that investments in roads reduce carbon emissions by 0 million tonnes per year, then that works ou
40.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
> JS minification is fairly mechanical and comparably simple, so the inversion should be relatively easy. Just because a task is simple doesn't mean its inverse need be. Examples: - multiplication / prime factorization -
41.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
Not quite. From the NY Times: > In a 5-to-4 decision, written by Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, a majority of the justices held that the federal bankruptcy code does not authorize a liability shield for third parties in bankruptcy agreements.
42.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
$1000/week is almost the median weekly earnings for full-time US employees ($1139/week) [1]. [1] https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/wkyeng.pdf
43.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
I think in both cases the OP assumes there are 100 men and 100 women. Case A: 1 man on birth control, 0 women on birth control. Case B: 0 men on birth control, 99 women on birth control. But it's hard to infer exactly what they meant b
44.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
That logic doesn't make any sense unless you assume there are 100 men to every woman on earth, or alternatively, that women have 100 times more sexual partners than men. Evidence suggests otherwise. Or put another way: you're comp
45.
by panda-giddiness 2y ago
I don't know about "perfectly", but we can simulate hydrogen from QCD; we just estimate the path integral directly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lattice_QCD
46.
by panda-giddiness 3y ago
That's the quote that stuck out to me, too. It's like they're insinuating that the person is lying (while elsewhere admitting they don't have evidence either way). I mean, I don't want to backseat-quarterback here,
47.
by panda-giddiness 3y ago
> The real issue is that most of the net worth is equity. These unrealized gains are not taxed. In some cases, a lot of the value is driven by speculation and not actually tied to the current profits of the company. This is why wealth ta
48.
by panda-giddiness 3y ago
I think it was clear that @sedatk was referring to the 1% that separates him from other human beings, not the 99% that separates him from trees.
49.
by panda-giddiness 3y ago
"Physics is to math what sex is to masturbation" -Feynman That said, I'm not sure that he actually held contempt for math. It's fairly essential for theoretical physics.
50.
by panda-giddiness 3y ago
"Special Counsel Obtained Trump’s Direct Messages on Twitter" https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/15/us/politics/trump-twitter...
51.
by panda-giddiness 3y ago
Just express it as an n-state Turing machine and see if it halts within BB(n) steps. /s
52.
by panda-giddiness 3y ago
Tegmark proposes no such thing; indeed, he may as well be proposing the exact opposite of what you claimed. He is essentially suggesting that all mathematical structures are "real", which would explain why the universe exists at a
53.
by panda-giddiness 3y ago
> I agree that there is a significant sliver of a philosophical problem which remains stubborn (how precisely does physical activity produce qualia) But that "sliver" of a problem is known as the hard problem of consciousness
54.
by panda-giddiness 4y ago
And also walking is not required for AGI.
55.
by panda-giddiness 4y ago
Interpret entropy as "how unlikely is this state to occur by random chance?", with lower entropy corresponding to less likelihood. If you throw a bunch of carbon, oxygen, and other organic compounds into a vat, you're vastly
56.
by panda-giddiness 4y ago
For those curious, the assumption that the universe began in a low entropy state is known as the past hypothesis [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_hypothesis
57.
by panda-giddiness 4y ago
I don't think you really groked your parent's comment. Asking why we don't see |dead> + |alive> states is like asking why we don't measure states of definite Jx when measuring Jz -- you're simply measuring in
58.
by panda-giddiness 4y ago
On the contrary, I'd be perfectly content classifying our probing of gravity/acceleration indirect, too. For completeness I include gravity because it's the only other fundamental interaction we arguably directly sense (inner
59.
by panda-giddiness 4y ago
Consider that of the four fundamental forces, we can only directly probe two: gravity (via the inner ear) and electromagnetism (all other sensory organs).
60.
by panda-giddiness 4y ago
The equivalence of gravity and acceleration is one of the major ideas of general relativity. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle

More ›