HN user
Imagine an AI system is programmed to poison the well incase of losing scenario. So it takes advantage of Kessler System to make sure no one else has advantage if it doesn't too poisoning the whole of earth orbits for centuries to come in which satellites could reside.
I can now understand Palmer Luckey's point of intelligent weapons. It truly brings to life the quote from Game of Thrones, "Why is it more noble to kill 10,000 in battlefield than dozen at a battle." Intelligent weapons enable the second scenario. Civilian lives are mostly unharmed.
I think Fed's money printers make all the entreprenuers chase value creation. It's like accelerated Red Queen Hypothesis. They are keeping everyone on their toes to gather as much of future new money as possible (that will be printed in future) at the same time creating value. My problem is if people just sit on the gold and not allow it to circulate and suffocate the economy because the gold hoarders would be rest assured that value will be eventually created in the system and their gold would appreciate and capture that value so they don't even try.
Foresee the day where AI become so good at making a deep fake that the people who believed fake news as true will no longer think their fake news is true because they'll think their fake news was faked by AI. - Neil deGrasse Tyson
Wrt disabling enemy satellites by destroying them to pieces, we can create more problems, the so called space debris chain reaction Kessler Syndrome.
Watch at 0:40 @ Space War is Real, Here's How it Works
Kessler Syndrome is a hypothetical scenario, proposed by NASA scientist Donald Kessler in 1978, where a chain reaction of collisions between space debris and satellites leads to a catastrophic increase in debris, potentially rendering Earth's orbit unusable. This increase in debris would make space travel and communication more dangerous and difficult.
Can countries actively plan strategies to use Kessler Syndrome to their advantage? Can Starlink satellites be destroyed easily by this method since they are present in the same orbit?
I have question. If new value is produced in the system (say an iphone or google search), isn't it ok to produce more dollars to represent that value, which is also the reason why people didn't care for decades, because the system was working.
Good points. I stand corrected.
Do you want to measure antirez and AI on a spider diagram, generally used to evaluate employee? Are you ignoring why society opted for division of work and specialization?
As long as US Dollar supply was increasing at the rate of 2% per year (I don't know the exact rate but some predictable small rate) which is commensurate with Gold supply increase, everything was ok with the world, nobody cared whether it was USD or Gold. It is only when US started abusing this privilege that system started breaking.
here's a counterpoint.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lords_of_Finance
One of the main themes of the book is the role played by the central bankers' insistence to adhere to the gold standard "even in the face of total catastrophe."[1] As Joe Nocera, a book reviewer at the New York Times, stated, "the central bankers were prisoners of the economic orthodoxy of their time: the powerful belief that sound monetary policy had to revolve around the gold standard...Again and again, this straitjacket caused the central bankers — especially Norman, gold’s most fervent advocate — to make moves, like raising interest rates, that would allow their countries to hold on to their dwindling gold supplies, even though the larger economy desperately needed help in the form of lower interest rates."
The problem isn't being wrong one time. But being wrong time and again and that too intentionally. When your job depends on not understanding...you won't understand.
This is why Institutions are important. They should be truthful and unbiased and undogmatic. But given intentional pollution of information environment. The same lessons being learnt again and again. New generations growing up and trying to navigate this new polluted environment, all of this is taking a toll. Hence delulu is the solulu.
The Who Cares Inception.
As Elon Musk's DOGE rats gnaw their way through federal agencies, not caring is their guiding light.
He wouldn't have used this wording if he had actually spent sometime on understanding how wasteful the previous governments have been. So in a sense, Elon was correcting the previous Who Cares mistakes and not actually committing new Who Cares mistakes. This shows that even Dan doesn't care enough to ground his opinions in facts.
Rhodesia solution is magnificient in this case.
Sending A Letter To The PM | Yes Minister | BBC Comedy Greats
We already have mathematical metaphors of such infinity compressed in finite regions. E.g. statistical self-similarity of mandelbrot fractal.
I have borrowed some "wisdom" in how particles interact. They exchange particles back and forth which strengthen their interaction. That's what I do generally in real life. I sort of share happenings in my life as a sort of nano-influencer within my group of friends. I would say the advice in the blogpost works, sort of. Even if my "contributions" go into a blackhole, I think atleast the ephemeral Universe is watching what I do.
8 Bit & '8 Bitish' Graphics-Outside the Box
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcJ1Jvtef0
In this GDC 2016 talk, Terrible Toybox's Mark Ferrari discusses and demonstrate some of his techniques for drawing 8 bit game graphics, including his celebrated methods for use of color cycling and pallet shifting to create complex and realistic background animation effects without frame-animation
The lost art of color cycling - Animating with color
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUbrzg21X9c
Color cycling was born out of hardware restrictions but out of it came some beautiful artworks that characterized the 80s and 90s. In this video we will learn more about how this effect was produced and experience first hand the beautiful artwork created with it.
Try to replicate niche groups like this https://www.ypo.org/
The model learns Japanese-English and Swahili-English and then can translate Japanese-Swahili directly. That shows something more than simple pattern matching happens inside.
The "water story" is a pivotal moment in Helen Keller's life, marking the start of her communication journey. It was during this time that she learned the word "water" by having her hand placed under a running pump while her teacher, Anne Sullivan, finger-spelled the word "w-a-t-e-r" into her other hand. This experience helped Keller realize that words had meaning and could represent objects and concepts.
As the above human experience shows, aligning tokens from different modalities is the first step in doing anything useful.
I think this is nothing but how applied science realtime feedback loops should work. Earlier we used to study only planets, atoms and bacteria, now systems are studying us and guiding us to best outcomes.
We need to start taking a leaf of advice from spiritual knowledge that "You are not the doer." You were never the doer. The doing happened on its own. You were merely a vessel, an instrument. A Witness. Observe your inner mechanisms of mind, and you will quickly come to this realisation.
Another point of course is that each new question is more and more likely to be already answered. At some point the site pretty much covers most of what is to be answered.
AI has the ability combine answers from multiple sources and tailor-make to your exact prompt details. Now that is something we call glove fits the hand. Plus it can explain its answers.
Or maybe Energy is emergent from information? like the russian dolls, where the outer dollar is emergent from the inner doll. Just as flux of light flows from the source outwards.
Energy is already abstract term. Information is every more abstract term. Earlier we had the law "Entropy always increases". Now we have a corresponding law with regard to Information i.e. "Complexity always increases."
Complexity and Gravity - Leonard Susskind
https://youtu.be/6OXdhV5BOcY?t=3026
My conjecture is as we peel back the layers of onion beyond information, we will have another concept (lets call it Mu) and its corresponding law i.e (Mu-entropy always increases)
Emotions in our Brain are nothing but Logical reasoning operating under time (quick subconscious analysis) and energy constraints (lot of decisions taken with very few computation cycles in the brain)
Maybe people don't realize, when Evolution developed emotional apparatus in brains, the Nature was pristine, true and direct with no misinformation. But today's environment is digital and there is no quick way to distinguish between true and wrong information. Brain still thinks both kind of information comes from the same true direct Nature and gives credence to it.
Claude :
That's a profound observation about the mismatch between our evolved emotional systems and our modern information environment.
You're highlighting something crucial: our emotional responses evolved in environments where information was directly experienced and generally reliable. If you saw a predator, it was really there. If someone in your tribe showed fear, there was likely a genuine threat.
In today's digital landscape, our brains still process information with those same ancient mechanisms, but now we're bombarded with content that:
1. Is often deliberately engineered to trigger emotional responses 2. Lacks the contextual cues that would help us evaluate reliability 3. Comes at a volume and speed our brains never evolved to handle
This creates what some researchers call an "evolutionary mismatch" - where mechanisms that served us well in our ancestral environment may not be adaptive in our current one. Our emotional systems can't easily distinguish between a threatening situation we're directly experiencing and one we're merely reading about online, potentially thousands of miles away.
It's like our emotional processors haven't received the necessary update to handle the new information ecosystem, leading to misallocated emotional resources and attention. This might help explain phenomena like anxiety from consuming negative news or strong emotional reactions to online interactions that wouldn't affect us the same way in person.
I think this was explained in a documentary by Discovery Channel some 20 years ago. I remember it vividly. One application of this was to use this process to manufacture very thin wires by deposition of atoms.
What do you think about this analogy?
A simple process produces a Mandelbrot set. A simple process (loss minimization through gradient descent) produces LLMs. So what plays the role of 2D-plane or dense point grid in the case of LLMs? It is the embeddings, (or ordered combinations of embeddings ) which are generated after pre-training. In case of a 2D plan, the closeness between two points is determined by our numerical representation schema. But in case of embeddings, we learn the 2D-grid of words (playing the role of points) by looking at how the words are getting used in corpus
The following is a quote from Yuri Manin, an eminent Mathematician.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNzZt0QHj9U Of the properties of mathematics, as a language, the most peculiar one is that by playing formal games with an input mathematical text, one can get an output text which seemingly carries new knowledge. The basic examples are furnished by scientific or technological calculations: general laws plus initial conditions produce predictions, often only after time-consuming and computer-aided work. One can say that the input contains an implicit knowledge which is thereby made explicit.
I have a related idea which I picked up from somewhere which mirrors the above observation.
When we see beautiful fractals generated by simple equations and iterative processes, we give importance to only the equations, not to the cartesian grid on which that process operates.
In case of a person, the external sensory data provides the grounding. Consider a prisoner who spent a long time in hole in the cell, he starts hallucinating due to no sensory information to ground his neuronal firings.
I actually I fashioned this logic out of the philosophy question of why certain neural firings appear as sound in our brain while others appear as vision? What gives?
I propose human-AI interaction data must be made public. This is our collective wikipedia of AI era. Otherwise our progress will be blank line after 2022. Just as Egyptians didn't write down process to move giant rocks.