wddkcs

14 ms·

121.
by wddkcs 3y ago
I get the results of it, I just don't see the value in even poisoning the data, unless you plan on monitizing it in the near term. Maybe the scrapping is imposing real operational costs on you, but then poisoning the data doesn't
122.
by wddkcs 3y ago
What's the point of poisoning the well, unless you plan on monitizing a clean flow?
123.
by wddkcs 3y ago
Arguably everything driven by capitalism is geared towards enshitification. Maximum extraction for minimal effort is a hard paradigm to beat
124.
by wddkcs 3y ago
Intelligence, or consciousness? As a novice in all the technical aspects, I fail to see the distinction between a 'self updating internal model', and a human conscious experience. I think some of the current characterizations of L
125.
by wddkcs 3y ago
How is THC being 'legally' sold even in states where it is illegal? Government in the US has proven too inefficient to handle the speed of marketplace innovation. You can't outlaw ingenuity.
126.
by wddkcs 3y ago
'hitting the brakes' isnt feasible. If it's done through legislation, it will be circumvented or cause more damage than good.
127.
by wddkcs 3y ago
They are- puns are contentless parasites that only replicate memetically. I never said they were hated by all, and my statement was in the context of a HN thread- obvious why such content is useless, even to the op themselves
128.
by wddkcs 3y ago
Puns are linguistic viruses of course they're negatively received
129.
by wddkcs 3y ago
Based on past trends, it's much more likely we will discover new sources and methods of resource generation, than not. Diamonds were rare, now lab created, electricity was once sparse now ubiquitous. The trend is obvious
130.
by wddkcs 3y ago
If those adjustments are to be made, they should be in increases in supply, not artificial constraints, that's my argument. Winning the lottery is imo more likely than finding a way to limit growth without draconian/totalitarian m
131.
by wddkcs 3y ago
Your analogy is an extreme example of the principle I'm referencing. Taken to a similar extreme, your argument is that we should choose who lives and who dies, through the limitation of the resources required for growth.
132.
by wddkcs 3y ago
Arguing against optimism is arguing against the history of science. We have cures to diseases that were declared unavoidable divine judgements, we have achieved feats of engineering that would be unimaginable a century ago. I am not arguing
133.
by wddkcs 3y ago
It's only bad if there aren't undiscovered sources and/or processes we can use in the future to produce more water. It's technological optimism, not disingenuousness.
134.
by wddkcs 3y ago
Enshitification of medicine. Americans really going to subject themselves to corporate butchery.
135.
by wddkcs 3y ago
The collective is resilient, it's individuals that perish.
136.
by wddkcs 3y ago
Not at all, Im not advocating for anything. In the same way the GP was as attacked for even asking about the validity of the Uighur genocide claim, you're now misrepresenting my statement. Why? Because the facts aren't the point,
137.
by wddkcs 3y ago
The Uighur genocide and other hugely determinant ambiguous events are endemic to modern life. It almost seems like a feature than a bug. There are so many iterations of this same phenomena- some hugely impactful moral question is poised, bu
138.
by wddkcs 3y ago
How do all of those conflicts compare to the 61 million people killed during the halycion days of the USSR? https://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/USSR.CHAP.1.HTM#:~:text=In... .
139.
by wddkcs 3y ago
People love to pretend that it wasn't the Soviets themselves that ended the USSR.
140.
by wddkcs 3y ago
It was lost in the sarcasm, but I was trying to emphasize the disparity. The fall of communism wasn't close in loss of life or resulting affects to any of those of hundreds of other events. What's more, how many people did Soviet
141.
by wddkcs 3y ago
Worse than the fall of the Roman empire, the decades of black plague, and ancient cataclysms that wiped out entire nations? Wow
142.
by wddkcs 3y ago
I agree about verifying. Currently there are some contested edits on Huberman's wiki. I was wondering if your credulity was related. https://www.reddit.com/r/HubermanLab/comments/15wlz4a/the_sc...
143.
by wddkcs 3y ago
You know he has a PhD but don't find that credible? I've seen Huberman smeared recently, don't understand why. Quick search shows he works at Stanford.
144.
by wddkcs 3y ago
Broad and stratified. To use an LLM to keep up with current events you need to be able to go around OAIs censors. Even better you can implement and fine tune your own LLM- I can see all these resources available but don't have the know
145.
by wddkcs 3y ago
The counter point is that the innovation never stopped, it just moved down a level. We 'optimized' the hardware (as in gave it sufficient form to fulfill necessary functions) then did the same for the application space. Twitter, F
146.
by wddkcs 3y ago
Yes I'm sure you're too well vested to be caught in the affairs of the world's richest.
147.
by wddkcs 3y ago
Wealth inequality affects the people, the polis, how could it not be political? I am not arguing for revolution, I am saying severe wealth inequality is a contributing factor to something I would rather avoid. No American should want our po
148.
by wddkcs 3y ago
You need to get more money, then youll be able to avoid those taxes, seems to be the point. Paradise Papers leak reveals secrets of the world elite's hidden wealth https://amp.theguardian.com/news/2017/nov&#x2
149.
by wddkcs 3y ago
When wealth inequality within a society is often a contributing factor to revolution and societal collapse, it's not an irrelevant factor. Your stance is fine and logical, but most people don't feel the same. The difference betwe
150.
by wddkcs 3y ago
Thank you- your link to non-constructive proofs led me to this HN comment, which seems to flesh out why such proofs are not applicable to P = NP https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29022963 Im just reading about constructi

More ›