pasquinelli

i'm puzzled by the choice to have an llm judge the images.

I'd be happier if you'd thrown in some concession like "I admit data is sometimes bad quality".

"be reasonable, meet them halfway."

stench ill

yeah but what you're saying is unclear.

for instance, when you say because they have to, not because they need to...

"have to" and "need to" mean the same thing, so i'm left with the choice of concluding your post is just mush or asking you to rephrase what you're trying to say in a way that's intelligible.

i mean their job is transporting people.

l must be named 1 because I is taken

is that meant as a response?

can you go a little more into that? i myself am not an accountant; what is zitron being dishonest about?

A lot of people prefer to see things in black and white because it's easier on the brain.

people also tend to sheild their sacred cows with gestures toward nuance. maybe i'm misreading you, but it sounds like your criticism of him is he has correctly identified a problem and is reporting on it, but he hasn't taken the next step of predicting the next twenty years of consequences. sounds to me like a reporter doing his job well.

it's not that they're bad at logic in general, it's that the "protecting the children" part gets them emotionally reactive, which bypasses logic. same thing happens when you tell a man who's emotionally reactive about his masculinity that soy will give him tits, just those words are enough to shut down his thinking.

people are plenty good at systems thinking. if we made them better at it, their emotional immaturity would still bypass it.

why do you think it was a bad choice?

beyond not caring. that little factoid would turn a lot of people into xenophobes.

a cabal isn't a social club.

here's a poem by ryokan expressing a similar sentiment

My legacy—What will it be?

Flowers in spring,

The cuckoo in summer,

And the crimson maples

Of autumn...

gasoline

kind of the flip side of pascal's "I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time." if someone does have the time to make the letter short, it'll take longer to read (where "read" means to grasp the subtleties of.)

interesting how that logic only applies about half the time.

Yeah, it's kind of mind boggling that Ted Chiang (of all people!) can't imagine intelligence without a body.

the subject is consciousness, not intelligence.

usually people romanticize china when they're comparing it to the united states. are chat apps in the US not infiltrated or run by america?

read "optimize the billionaire class" as "trim the fat."

if we optimize the billionaire class everyone's better off, like i said. of course we can go orange catholic, but my comment was premised on how we might apply ai.

see what you don't understand is that the owning class actually bring crucial long term strategic vision. i wonder though: we always talk of ai replacing the working class, but wouldn't it be more economical for ai to provide that long term strategic thinking? i'm sure the operating costs for ai would be way less than the operating costs of billionaires. everyone would be better off.

Historically, more efficient agriculture meant a population boom. That's kinda the opposite of people starving to death.

not necessarily. you're inadvertently conflating things. just more people alive doesn't mean they aren't starving. a population boom can be had in the starving population too.

Everyone has different situations and different level of risk.

that's true, and also why it's prudent to not go around giving unsolicited family advice to strangers.

also it's why, when you're talking about one particular woman you've never met, you should keep the demographic insights you think you have about her to yourself.

if that's the one where you get to own things then there wasn't trade before capitalism, because you can't trade things without ownership. is that what you're saying?

so how's it the beauty of capitalism?

why did anyone trade prior to capitalism?

i've been waiting for you to share your conclusion for the last ten years. finally, i can sleep again.

Greed isn't a problem.

you listed

1. buying the cheapest groceries you can reasonably find 2. trying to get the highest salary you can 3. literally any time you try to get more for yourself

that's a weak list from which to conclude that greed isn't a problem, especially since in the case of 1. and 2. someone's making money off you, the person who's supposedly greedy in these scenarios.

so in your mind "advertisement" covers any transmission of information?