ukj

17 ms·

121.
by ukj 5y ago
You seem to misunderstand the entire reason humans form societies. Strength in numbers. Economies of scale. Division of labour. The collective well-being of individuals. If you don’t like all the social perks and safety nets you are enjoyin
122.
by ukj 5y ago
If that were true, and you were willing to allow me the same level of freedom as you demand for yourself then surely my freedom to harm you trumps your well-being?
123.
by ukj 5y ago
Almost as if reducing mortality/hospitalization is an irrelevant metric to you. Almost as if an abstract social construct as “rights” is more important to you than actual health.
124.
by ukj 5y ago
Do you have a better strategy, or are you just practicing fallacies? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy
125.
by ukj 5y ago
The experiment design is ready and waiting! The participants are all lined up. Just have to bribe the ethics board!
126.
by ukj 5y ago
>We are not good at accepting criticism, especially valid and accurate criticism. That's not quite how I would characterise it. I am not particularly good at accepting valid and accurate criticism if nothing actionable follows from
127.
by ukj 5y ago
"Freedom" is a symbol. Like all symbols and all symbolism it means nothing to Bob and everything to Bill. It means one things to Sarah and another to Sally. One person's freedom is another's tyranny and vice versa. It&#x
128.
by ukj 5y ago
How do you rollback typos in messages you've already sent?
129.
by ukj 5y ago
The entire point of vaccintation is to enable a road to immunity which kills less people than simply getting infected. If we were OK with the death rate of naturally-attained immunity we didn't need a vaccine.
130.
by ukj 5y ago
Guess you don’t understand default choice, huh? Choosing not to choose commits you to the status quo: risk of COVID hospitalisation/death.
131.
by ukj 5y ago
The favourite trick of misinformation purveyors is stripping away context. Then they can hide behind equivocation. Risk is risk! Even manifest risk is risk!
132.
by ukj 5y ago
Ask these exact questions to the person who originally hesitated to vaccinate and got COVID. The risk of hospitalisation/death wasn’t zero. And yet… they chose COVID through inaction. And for what? “I am not an anti-vaxxer but was hold
133.
by ukj 5y ago
Nelson later withdrew his proof (after Terrence Tao corrected him). Instead, he took a philosophical position on the matter of whether Mathematics is discovered or invented: https://web.math.princeton.edu/~nelson/papers
134.
by ukj 5y ago
There is literally no law which forbids you from being a passenger in your autonomous helicopter in your private land/airspace! Allowing autonomous helicopters in public airspace is a political debate that can be had once somebo
135.
by ukj 5y ago
Which existing flying car design on the market would you like our politicians to approve for general use? Helicopters are already approved for general use. Not sure what your point is.
136.
by ukj 5y ago
>But the absolutely overwhelming majority of people who use cars need to be able to do so on public roads. Yes but that is ONLY a permitting/approval hurdle. Before we approve any particular autonomous vehicle for road use first w
137.
by ukj 5y ago
Why? Race cars/Track driving. Off-roading. Large, private estates. A large percentage of the terrains where vehicles are being used are NOT public roads. This is especially true in Africa. No permit is required to own/use a vehi
138.
by ukj 5y ago
In most countries you don't need a license unless you plan on using the vehicle on public roads. This is just a regulatory criterion and adds nothing to the technology.
139.
by ukj 5y ago
By the way... your conception of a pure function is incoherent. Parameters ARE inputs. Results ARE outputs. Renaming them to something else is just obscuring the fact that you are still talking about a function with side-effects. So using P
140.
by ukj 5y ago
You know what... let me take your red herring away from you. Forget the Time.now function. Here's a !=a as a "pure" function. In [1]: class A: ...: def __eq__(self, other): ...: return False ...:
141.
by ukj 5y ago
>Find the error. Still waiting for you to implement equal() as a "pure" function. We can discuss what you mean by "error" once we have a referent (that's not just in your head) to talk about.
142.
by ukj 5y ago
Yeah, but there's an epistemic/cultural issue at play. There's an entire thread below where Mathematicians are aggressively objecting to me demonstrating some of those alternative notions to the point of calling the realizati
143.
by ukj 5y ago
I am aware ;) The question was calculated. It's obvious that you can't substitute Peter Parker (before the accident) for Spider-man. The Mathematical idea of equality-as-substitution ignores time. Which is why I called it "re
144.
by ukj 5y ago
>Failure to be completely expressive about a paradigm is not itself a paradigm. Its just faulty reasoning. I am being as expressive as my expressivity allows! for x in all-entities-in-universe: SOMETIMES(x = x) Here is an example
145.
by ukj 5y ago
>If you can't substitute Peter Parker for Spider-Man, then they are by definition not equal... This is too reductionist. Can you substitute Peter Parker(before the lab accident) for Spider-Man ?
146.
by ukj 5y ago
Is it a good-faith, or bad-faith argument to point out that philosophers (myself included) don't know what they are talking about? As in literally asking the question: What is Philosophy about? The only answer we can give is political.
147.
by ukj 5y ago
Well, it seems our disagreeme is obvious. You only want to talk about pure functions. I want to talk about ALL functions. So lets define the function "pure" such that pure(f) -> True when f is a pure function pure(g) -&
148.
by ukj 5y ago
None of our formal systems “accurately describe the design”. They all have domains of applicability - operational parameters. The appeal of the simulation hypothesis is that IF our formalisms could actually explain all of reality THEN it fo
149.
by ukj 5y ago
And I am asking you to provide the actual implementation of your hypothetical function equal(). I don't need to know the implementation of the real function == from any programming language because, without looking at any source code I
150.
by ukj 5y ago
>please provide the implementation of your Time.now function and I'll tell you its implicit parameters. You are missing the point about extensional and intensional properties of functions. If you want to look "inside" my T

More ›