truculent

These theories are flawed in the sense that they cannot account for subjective experience and agency, amongst other things.

That agency or free will exists outside of our subjective experience is an assumption; does any given theory need to explain agency, or is it sufficient to explain that we feel we have agency?

The point is that if you have a 10% chance of frying motherboard, at 10 a week, you might expect 1 fried p/w, but it could easily be more which may be catastrophic.

At 1000, the number of fried boards will be more predictable and therefore the risk to the business is lower, even if the long-run averages are the same.

Ted Chiang vindicated again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lifecycle_of_Software_Obje...

Hypothetically speaking, if people in the last group were right, and that is the logical conclusion to be reached from careful evaluation of the evidence, wouldn’t the other positions indeed be ones of wilful denial of the state of the climate?

This isn’t some hipster nostalgia trip or a flip phone for people who think the 90s were peak civilization. This is something way cooler. A phone that gives you back something we didn’t even realize we’d lost. The ability to actually, truly, shut the hell up.

As an example: I'm autistic and I learn inside-out, building larger new concepts out of smaller existing ones; those with Asperger's on the other paw, learn outside-in instead, breaking down larger existing concepts into smaller new ones; both are part of the "autism spectrum", but differ very fundamentally.

This is a really interesting observation - can you expand on this a bit more, please? How did you first notice this distinction?

When, for example, learning a new concept in math or physics, what would outside-in look like vs inside out? Would you characterise neurotypical learning in one way or the other?

Privilege isn't just about wealth. The point is that although anyone can ignore the news, the news won't necessarily ignore them!

You may enjoy https://pugsql.org

For some reason

_brief_ but enjoyable era

AGI will behave as if it were sentient but will not have consciousness

How could we possibly know that with any certainty?

I like all of the above but have no understanding of the BEAM or OTP. Can you recommend a good place to start learning about that?

Was it Waterland by Graham Swift (fiction, but has some eel diversions IIRC)?

Isn't the issue that historical data is consistent with the overturning model, which adds weight to our assumption that it has previously been stable. These new measurements (and observations?) are consistent with the overturning circulation weakening.

I agree with you in principle - my impression (perhaps wrong - not an expert) was that there are additional data points supporting the idea of a consistent status quo.

I quite like the idea of ruling that device sellers have to either offer software support, or allow the hardware to be unlocked

Lovely idea - thanks

Is this you have implemented in practice? Sounds like a great idea, but I have no idea how you would make it work it a structured way (or am I missing the point…?)

I'm guessing even a busy/congested freeway has a greater throughput per lane than transit

Not even remotely close: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Route_capacity

Are you suggesting that the authors’ “bounce” would only happen if the energy was not enough to put them into different states?

The black hole universe also offers a new perspective on our place in the cosmos. In this framework, our entire observable universe lies inside the interior of a black hole formed in some larger “parent” universe.

What specifically is meant by interior? Does this mean “within the event horizon” or something else?

I think their point is that that is a commit message. You can then review the set of changes as you would a PR.

A favourite of mine is the London Underground having warnings about using the escalators, stating that last year there were 100 incidents from people not being sufficiently careful.

Given the number of people using the service, this is incredibly small and I hardly think a sign is going to help the few people at risk!

I think the argument is that the real issue is political will and not structural issues in government.

Personally, it seems fair to call that political dysfunction too, but it’s reasonable to try and make the distinction.

It is centrist because it fails to propose a different way of doing things or structuring society. Just because it’s a liberal vision, doesn’t mean it’s not centrist.

There is certainly overlap with right wing elements, too. Although UK focused, it’s hard not to see the right wing undercurrents in this Abundance-type manifesto: https://ukfoundations.co/

A nominal increase in value, while becoming more affordable in real terms might be feasible.

However to do this would require inflation of other goods, matched by wage rises, which would require actions that the British political establishment is not willing to take.

Northern Ireland has done much better over the past decade IIRC, with more government spending and investment per head than the rest of the UK. I visited last year and felt the difference was immediately noticeable.

Any sufficiently advanced method of programming will start to look less like natural language and more like a programming language.

If you still don’t want to do programming, then you need some way to instruct or direct the intelligence that _will_ do the programming.

And any sufficiently advanced method of instruction will look less like natural language, and more like an education.

The polycrisis?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycrisis

If you want software to exhibit human values, the development process probably looks more like education or parenting prompting.

Or so says Ted Chiang: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lifecycle_of_Software_Ob...

While it shares some similarities with animism, it’s a fundamentally materialist viewpoint, which puts it at odds with animism. Materialism is so rooted within our culture that I think it can be hard to fully grok alternative viewpoints.

I don’t understand why so many people are convinced that these newfangled automobiles will replace horses. It sounds like unsubstantiated hype to me.

There are a few reasons why I don’t believe cars will replace horses anytime soon:

1. Riding and caring for a horse is about much more than just transportation. Horses have been an integral part of life for centuries—they provide companionship, work the land, and serve in countless roles beyond simple travel. Even if you consider only their use for getting from place to place, riding is a skill that people take pride in, and I don’t see that disappearing overnight.

2. The maintenance and upkeep of these machines seem like a nightmare. A horse may need food and care, but it doesn’t require expensive parts, specialized fuel, or constant repairs from trained mechanics. If a carriage breaks, any competent craftsman can fix it—but if one of these new engines fails, who will know how to repair it?

3. From what I’ve seen, these automobiles are still prone to frequent breakdowns and failures. They get stuck in mud, they require smooth roads (which hardly exist outside cities), and they are unreliable compared to a well-trained horse. If a machine fails, you’re stranded—whereas a horse will always find its way home.

I know people will argue that these machines are improving rapidly and that soon they’ll overcome these issues. But I think these challenges are fundamental and won’t be solved anytime soon.

What I do believe, however, is that for certain tasks, automobiles may assist in making travel more efficient. But replace the horse entirely? I just don’t see it happening.