tdehnel

20 ms·

151.
by tdehnel 4y ago
> unlimited growth is followed by resource exhaustion and death. This is only true in the physical sense if the universe is singular *and finite. Which it appears not to be. It is never true in the sense of technological, economic, and
152.
by tdehnel 4y ago
The way I see it, even if there’s a war or Covid or whatever, if people don’t have more money to spend, they can’t pay higher prices. Then you get a recession. If they do have the money (because you printed more) they pay the higher prices.
153.
by tdehnel 4y ago
Not surprising that a “lynguist” would think this. But it’s wrong. Animals can communicate with language (whales, chimps, etc etc). The thing that makes humans special is their ability to create and use explanatory knowledge. That’s why hum
154.
by tdehnel 4y ago
I think you can find exceptions in any discussion, but that's not exactly helpful. Here's the thing: If I don't answer the user's query accurately, another website will. Then they will get all the traffic. So my long ter
155.
by tdehnel 4y ago
You are already paying a lot more than that for the USPS. $2 extra to save myself hours of sorting through mail for the next 10 years is worth it.
156.
by tdehnel 4y ago
It’s not controversial to say we have to stick to reason and logic in the pursuit of truth. But there is nothing about understanding the difference between human and machine intelligence that is forbidden by any reason or logic that I am aw
157.
by tdehnel 4y ago
Hi, I have a small SEO consultancy. We work with tech companies (mostly B2B saas), many you’ve heard of. You’re right that some approaches to SEO are sleazy. They are a bit old fashioned at this point, and usually result in short term resul
158.
by tdehnel 4y ago
The smugness of your reply annoyed me. But I feel somewhat satisfied that you’re just misinterpreting what I said. I never said copying existing images, I said it’s using what already exists for inspiration. That is not the same as creativi
159.
by tdehnel 4y ago
This single quote from Wittgenstein might just be the dumbest statement ever made. How would we ever make progress if we did not discuss what we don't understand, and critique and debate new creative ideas?
160.
by tdehnel 4y ago
Sorry to be this guy but that is not creativity. It’s using what already exists, not conjecturing something new. Contrast with real creativity (what people can do but machines currently cannot) where you conjecture something completely new.
161.
by tdehnel 4y ago
>Citation needed. That's a lazy critique. With a lack of concrete evidence either way, we can only rely on the best explanation (theory). What's your explanation for how an AGI is just an ant with more compute? I've given
162.
by tdehnel 4y ago
But the spectrum is an illusion. It’s not like humans are just chimpanzees (or ants or cats) with more compute. Put differently, if you took an ant or cat or chimpanzee and made it compute more data infinitely faster, you wouldn’t get AGI.
163.
by tdehnel 4y ago
Optimism is the belief that problems can be solved. Since any solution not specifically prohibited by the laws of physics is possible, I’m going to go with optimism on this one.
164.
by tdehnel 4y ago
Right on cue the microplastic doom cult shows up whenever the word plastic appears. Let’s have a little optimism eh guys? This is not even a problem as far as anyone can tell, and even if it were it would be solvable.
165.
by tdehnel 4y ago
The precautionary principle is a great way of slowing progress to a crawl. The only way to solve massive problems like the things you’re afraid of is to make as much progress as possible as quickly as possible.
166.
by tdehnel 4y ago
Because it’s very unlikely that we know everything there is to know about making computers work faster. It’s the same reason people like Malthus are typically wrong. He thought the world would be out of food by this point. But he never pred
167.
by tdehnel 4y ago
https://web.archive.org/web/20220518134812/https://www.nytim...
168.
by tdehnel 4y ago
You don’t get proof from Bayesian reasoning (data). That’s not how science is done. The best proof of any idea is whether it is a good logical explanation that stands up to criticism. Take Newton’s ideas about gravity and the motion of bodi
169.
by tdehnel 4y ago
It doesn’t seem likely to me that a civilization with the ability to travel interstellar distances would have any use at all for our planet or resources. I mean, the amount of matter in “empty” space between them and us would be enormous. W
170.
by tdehnel 4y ago
> Either a system is sustainable or it's not. If it is, it can continue forever. And, if it's not, it won't. One way or another, it won't, though you can pick the method early on, and later, reality will force it on y
171.
by tdehnel 4y ago
I’ve often wondered the same thing, good on you for actually doing it. That said, in any set of 20+ variables there will be a 10 highest/10 lowest correlating. Without a good (specific, hard to vary) explanation as to why the correla
172.
by tdehnel 4y ago
I used to be worried about it. But I was making the mistake of thinking getting to AGI was just a question of more compute. I thought as computers get faster, we will eventually ramp up to AGI. Like going from the brain of an ant, to a mous
173.
by tdehnel 5y ago
You can be actively anti-status seeking by valuing, rewarding, and praising people who are not seeking status. In this way we can be the change we wish to see.
174.
by tdehnel 5y ago
in this comment you are doing the exact thing the article talks about, positioning groups as good guys/bad guys and thus signaling your status as either a good guy or someone who at least knows the difference.
175.
by tdehnel 5y ago
>This is not a given. Not with that attitude!
176.
by tdehnel 5y ago
But new knowledge is always created as people solve problems which inevitably pop up. And the ethics of today are replaced with new ethics (knowledge) as people conjecture new ideas. This process goes one way. Free speech leads to progres
177.
by tdehnel 5y ago
The point is we don’t know. We will never know which new knowledge is created and which new problems will be caused. But only by allowing open and free trade of ideas will we be able to quickly solve them. But to take your point and run wit
178.
by tdehnel 5y ago
Why not just raise existing taxes across the board to pay for this? Seems a lot more fair since pro-social benefits are distributed among the whole society.
179.
by tdehnel 5y ago
You got the wrong idea. I’m saying when we limit speech we risk limiting progress, not eliminating progress all together. The key is that we have no idea how we are limiting progress because the progress has yet to happen. But it will, as
180.
by tdehnel 5y ago
Firstly your belief is knowledge that was created at some point and it spread because people had the right to say it. Second, a just society is dependent on there being a society at all. The only way humans will solve the problems that th

More ›