effed3

just (bad) opinions, without even minimal evidences of of -real- facts.

The crisis of Europe is way more in the massive investment in speculative finance than in real in-house investments and development, in the past 30 years. results? No resources = no strategic tech, no defence, no cheap energy, low employments, no higher wages, no redistribution, no public sanity, austerity to keep orders in states finances = no resources for development, and so spiraling downward.

Blaming immigration, green-tech and fighting-succes (?!) is simply brainless vapor.

putting mirrors in orbit to have (little) more light is like buiding city underwater to have more cool. ops this last will be way less stupid in the future... To downvote a different opinion without arguing is same kind of attitude: stay fresh.

Earth orbits, low orbits above all, are a finite resource, and suffer pollution as every environment, with all this kind of satellites growing in number to millions, things can go badly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome

Apart tecnical and scientific reasons (no need to use thousand or million of sats), apart big speculations (suspect is the main reason), many problems can be resolved in others ways.

This is not -progress-, is speculaton, at astronomical level, as 1M sat in orbit, only a very small part of humans will benefit (shareholders, but i doubt all), all the rest not even. We really need to surf web at Gb/s speed in the mid of nowhere?

probably only peoples who has the gift of doubt can argue in the common search of knowledge. Everything else, right or wrong, are, as stated, more about ego, quite useless about real problem solving..

Sure no one like to be wrong, so to argue with is necessary to spark interest in the search of alternative point of view.

Remembering Hagakure: "To give a person an opinion one must first judge well whether that person is of the disposition to receive it or not. One must become close with him and make sure that he continually trusts one's word." ..... "Have him receive this in the way that a man would drink water when his throat is dry, and it will be an opinion that will correct faults."

Words from a more civilized ages.

I don't have read jaines. To me the language was different yes, but the mind is another thing, but the two are cleary related. I think humans need (and create) more concepts, more complex/different idea, to grasp/describe a more complex world around, but the mind is equally capable now as 50k-years ago.

Probably in the past minds can contemplate things we are not more aware today, who know? is not all about rational and scientific thinking, is not more or less advanced, is simply different, and in the past humans needed a quite different set of ideas and tools than today.

Just travel to Papua-NewGuinea and check with some tribe in a lost valley, straigh from Neolythic, some does not have a concept of "3", but children can learn arithmetic as everyone else, they can contemplate every concept we have, given the right path.

Stocks are deep linked to the economy, but the ownership of stocks is primarily shared by the public.

Ok, this is the situation, but seems to me that few biggest holders in pratice has real control, within the complexity of the financial systems that shade the complexity of true ownership, and the wide public ownership, because the fragmentation, has no real control, only the benefits, if any, and this is the trick.

But the core question, to me, is: it is a real value? the shares/speculation market is more than ten times the real economy, it is safe? I doubt.

Look at SpaceX public shares, are 5%, the rest? Musk and others few financial actors.

probably this is an effect of a much more simple environment and tasks in the past: Sleep, hunt and not been hunted, eat, reproduce. the minds seems simpler, but is apparent.

We live in a more complex world, this produce someting more complex, culture, ideas, knowledge, tasks, technology, craps.. but basic intelligence i think is the same (if not better in the past, less "pollution")

is not too difficult to find "very bad ideas" today, just look around. The point is about knowledge and culture, not individuals

Really funny to read.

but refleting uppon: maybe "aliens" are another name for a kind of ignorance spreading around. basic science and history simply gone. Not so funny to think about.

talking of "quality" tasks, quite all, giving people some time.

stocks values are deep linked to real economy, moving such amount of value can do big effects on real world, inflations, investments, development decisions..

In the hands of such small elite individuals is even worse, because financial activity at this levels call for deregulations more and more, and without clear rules the effects on all the ordinary people are big and real, the "pile of money" is the real money missing in the lives of all the rest of the world.

Big wealths are ok, but when some (millions) are (quite) missing the basic for living, i think some adjustments are needed.

Maybe gen-z "socialist" aspiration are too "passionate" but (to me) look in the right direction, the actual form of planetary capitalism is way out of control and totally unable to even the slight change or reform. Is not X is right and Y is wrong, we need a mix of both to stay afloat, and actually markets and finance only say "more and more speculation", obvious that some young people, having still the capacity of dream and imagine alternatives, got a bit of rage.. Even stranger, many of the true economists around (those really study the complex system of economy, and not only pushing out propaganda) say that a more equity, (true)investments, and redistibution will help even the rich, in the long period. So fight back? until the end of the world?

"argosel makes your thudra all tizzy. contains thirty arps of ramstat pulz, for shell lubrication"

Interesting book,thanks for signaling.

Car with motors burning fossil fuels are (probably, hopefully) doomed. But a combustion engine using synthetic-fuels made with CO2 + solar energy can play a role, like a small compact light co-generator parallel at battery pack onboard.

Chemical storage of solar/wind energy can be an option more than battery tech, other than recapturing and storing CO2.

One thing is try to do a new(?) math in a finite way, good luck, we will see the results, and check agains is still proved. (I think others contraddiction will arise, will be funny..) Another thing is to start a holy war against a concept, to delete it, only to make disappear some problems and not work to resolve it -introducing- new concepts, the way science advances. Unless proving something -wrong- in science, to ban in the name of some beliefs, seems not a good idea to me.

AGI will earn a salary, pay taxes, buy goods? So this is: maximizing for efficiency and production, but who will buy all this? Maybe pushing all possible to AI / AGI will end in a global deep recession or worse, seems the course is under the eyes of us all.

Proposals like this has more to do with Finance (spaceX quotation / funding / shares values) than real applications. But is anyway a risky very bad idea.

After ROTFL, and checking is not 1st april, seems in the same line of: "life is a disease, sexually transmitted, with 100% lethal exitus".

More seriously (very little indeed) maybe the 'problem' is all those activities that need to create more and more new problems/disorders to justify all the work uppon, so what if psychiatry is a psychiatric disorder? regressum ad infinitum, take the red pill.

About happiness, Buddha, asked about the way to happines, say: happiness is not the destination, is the way.

Power tools? seems something more -high level- like: "Make me a table", not "saw this board", and evolving to: "make me a 2-level house". Will the house be solid? You have to cheek indeed, and more complex the tool, mode depth the checking of the results, given the uncertains about the inned workings of these systems. But correct use of these tools is IMHO the big big problem. The -best- tool-language-tech is the one you know well, because this will avoid the use for the wrong problem, a situation very uneasy discovering ahead in development. Those AI tools are well understood? Seems not quite.

> Suddenly, the monstrosity of infinity, long feared by mathematicians, could no longer be relegated to some unreachable part of the number line. It hid within its every crevice.

Exageration, the quite mayority of mathematician live very well with infinity, just handle with care.

and do not forget this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banach%E2%80%93Tarski_paradox way more technical, but wonderfull

Giving no credits on a "co-author" is a bit different than plagiarize (a theft). It's reasonable to suppose than both authors can have reach results indipendently, given enough time, working on the same matter, maybe Dedekind before Cantor? Probably Cantor has the core ideas in it's mind, and Deedekind's arguments was similar enough to push him proced. Sure Dedeking has given a (big) contribution, but the core concept is from Cantor

The Hypothesis formulated has to be proved true, not the opposite. "LLM only appear intelligent": now prove this wrong.

maybe a wise use of technology?: never adopt a higher complexity tech when a lower one fit well. And white boards are less clear (to me) and markers dry (often in the worst moment). And about slides... very easy for prof, but i cannot copy a slide, always follow the reasoning, so having the things written is best, writing indeed is another side of thinking.

_

About efficiency (energetic), correctness and safety (logical), seems way long from a forward step (by now). [Lemma (: from Murphy's Laws of Computer Programming, wisdom from a more civilized era: Build a system that even a fool can use, and only a fool will want to use it.]

i like "all sort of good things" (and more if are really available for -all-) but IMHO relating these to an aeternal even bigger growth is a big misconception, seems to me that now the bigger part of growth is going to benefits very few, and polluting/undermining the rest of the world, vanishing the "good thing" for the rest of us. I imagine growth more as a consequence of a really sane economy, capable to adapt, expand and even shrink when necessary without devastating markets and real GDP, i cannot think now 'growth' as the foundation of a real sustainable and development in the near future. Is like 'progress', a word mainly referring to speed and more speed, but never about 'direction'.

Returning to AI, really can these new techs benefits all of us? I doubt. In some sectors AI techs can be a great aid (expert systems, data mining, ) but this growth of LLM things seems a big bubble, more related to speculation than others. just my 5c.

only if you have a real (sane, sustainable, efficient) economy to give the money some value. without a real economy money is a number in a computer/a piece of paper, and growing is constrained by the finite resources of the world

Economy is way too much growth, as inequality and inefficiency, pollution, and resource exaustion, being mainly based on finance and speculation and not on -real- economy, for the good of a very small part of humanity. Has to grow in this manner even more? And with the help of AI?

If some rules are not changed and a more equality model is developed, there are no more world at all.