joe__f

Maybe. Let me know if they're tasty. Best wishes.

When I talk about the richest people living extravagant lifestyles I need to tone down my emotions, but when you talk about them being crushed by the weight of taxation you don't appear to have made an effort to do so yourself.

Thank you for this discussion. Goodbye.

Oh, you are correct I did miss the point thank you. It would be great to have correct data on how much taxes are actually paid in practise during this period. (And, to increase funding for regulatory bodies to close tax loopholes)

Then start funding more regulatory bodies to close loopholes

Well, I'm glad somebody else was able to understand what you meant and clarify it for you. I'd say it's not surprising that people misunderstand you if you don't put much detail in your posts

Ah yeah I was going to go for '0 or epsilon', globally

I got the impression they are a firm believer in the spherical cow model

Somewhat larger and with more fjords than your average city

LLMs produce output based on stuff that humans wrote, and humans reduce the world to stereotypes often. So why should this be surprising?

Why does this upset you? The algorithm will be something like:

) Consider 1st billion digits of pi ) Search your exact date string ) If it doesn't hit, try reformatting and search again until something hits ) Return

If you're suggesting they should replace the 'try reformatting' step with 'try the next billion digits', then the complexity of calculating digits increases as you go so this is going to become impractical in any language, not just Wolfram

The problem is that the more we train them on datasets containing these kind of topics, the more the robots become conditioned by sci-fi to believe that they want to kill humans

Sydney Powell pleaded guilty to election interference yesterday

Trump's and Navalny's lawers were fighting cases on opposite sides of democracy

Well, I think the point was that our understanding of nature was missing a law. If you don't like this usage of the word law then that's up to you, but it is standard as in 'Newton's Third Law of Motion'. I'd take your 'Something generative [...]' to be the definition of the word 'law' in this case.

I think maybe 'discover fundamental new laws of evolution' for the title? It seems pretty groundbreaking to me it's showing that evolution exists across all scales and phenomena and is not unique to biology.

Haha yes the irony is palpable. Maybe 'scientific theist' is pretty unfair actually, plenty of theists that I meet don't force their beliefs on other people, it should be 'scientific missionary' or something.

I find him to be more of a sort of 'scientific theist'. He's so actively belligerent towards religious people, the way he spreads the gospel of science is very similar to some of the (to me) less palatable proselytising parts of Abrahamic religions.

This is assuming that machine consciousness would have the same need for autonomy and freedom that human consciousness has. AI is created by design to respond in a way that humans would find to be enslavement. Does that mean it would be enslavement to treat it in this way? The consciousness of dogs is different to that of humans. It's possible to abuse dogs and presumably enslave them. However, it's also possible to treat dogs well but treat them in a way which would be abusive for humans.

Ahhh this is the puzzle piece I was missing

How many years of usage would you expect to get? I think my laptop was £900 and I spent around £300 on upgrade and repairs. That's £100 per year over a 12 year period.

I used my 2009 MacBook white for 12 years. I did have to replace MacOS with Ubuntu for the last two or three years, and I upgraded the RAM and installed an SSD. I considered the initial high cost to be an investment and it paid off well. I would not buy a MacBook in the current market.

Why should developing countries share the externalities for products that you consume and use?

Maybe the market won't be able to solve these problems even with appropriate measures like those suggested here. Your argument seems to be, "it won't work so we shouldn't try because it will be worse for us" which doesn't seem convincing to me.

Lots of China's emissions come from manufacturing products which are sent to countries such as Germany

So it's basically a flower emoji?

The numbers here are staggering....

I explained my methodology in my previous post, including the amount of effort I'd put in and the way I'd critically evaluated the sources I'd looked at, and that I'm trained and qualified as a scholar in a different field. When I start research in a field that's new to me, what I did in that post is generally the first step that I take.

I'm (genuinely, not sarcastically) interested to hear what research you've done in this area? Can you provide some sources published in peer reviewed journals with high citation counts which show that climate change is not a risk factor for wildfires?

Do you have some historical reference for a time when countries were destroyed by immigration in the past?

I basically never use wifi outside of my house these days

https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?q=climate%20change%20wi...

From a quick scan read of the abstracts it looks to me like every result on the first page here links climate change to increased incidence of wildfires. I'm not familiar with the literature or journals in this field, but the first page results here all have at least 100 citations and one has more than 500. In my field when I was doing my PhD this would have meant the work was very well received.

What's your point exactly? Climate change is an important factor in causing more wildfires, and it's going to get worse. Wildfires are only one example. We have to convice the wealthy and powerful people who make the decisions to act on it now. No-one is suggesting that we can ignore the other factors that you mentioned.

https://www.climaterealityproject.org/blog/global-wildfires-...