BingoAhoy
BingoAhoy on Hacker News
Yes I agree with you and Descartes the only thing we can be certain of as conscious observers is we exist.
But I moved on from moderate uncertainty leading to a default of skepticism.
Some actions have very predictable outcomes even if they aren't guaranteed. with those I like to use the vernacular that implies certainty. That's how I feel about nuclear exchange. But I don't associate the probabilities of expectation of nuclear exchange and invasion as conditional upon each other. A surprise outcome in an invasion of a nonnuclear non-nato state wouldn't lead me to feel a nuclear exchange probability suddenly becomes inverted similarly.
Because countries have invaded others during nuclear times. That should come as no surprise to a student of history even if many didn't expect Putin to in this particular instance.
But the pressing matter is would Putin use nukes? Would he use nukes if it means easy escalation to a mutual exchange where him and his country would end up as ash? Nah I don't believe he would unless some development allowed him to nuke with impunity.
You thought Russia wasn't going to invade Ukraine. I had other opinions.
Russia isn't going to nuke anyone. It's a gambit to make NATO pause and slow down their reaction.
History is full of nuke threats and no follow through (well except 2 incidents).
Money is fake, it's an abstraction made of cheap throw away goods (what money is printed on) used as a representation for real resources. I personally wouldn't count it as relevant but it does buy access to what is relevant.
I would add to your list, some of the finite resources I can think of that's wasted here is labor per human per year. The labor of those boat builders. It's an opportunity cost type of waste.
Stephen King was an English major. Word art, literature, helps people advance cognitively.
English is an unowned cultivated intellectual property that greases communication which greases all other human endeavors. I think its underappreciated.
Not all education needs to advance the frontier, much of it is about maintaining what we've already claimed and passing it on to new generations.
I've always been curious about who's winning the lionshare of the pie of these gluttonous institutions. Is it administrators? they're an easy scape goat. Does it fund more research, so presumably the PHDs and their research assistants?
"Big tech permabanned me and doesn't mind false positives"
Isn't this often the case with humans minus the algorithm making the decision? Many times of the few times I've been in trouble, with HR, the law, or whatever authority you realize doing things that seem bad but aren't actually bad is almost as dangerous as doing something actually harmful because turns out humans aren't very good judges of ambiguous cases in low information environments.
Even when not ambiguous humans by and large don't have a good grasp of what is or isn't moral. And they typically show a large lack of empathic ability for how their actions will effect others.
This isn't unique to coders. Various successful writers have also reported the same issue. They only have a few super productive hours a day.
Is it too pessimistic? Human history is filled with empires dominating their weaker neighbors, culling many of them (though not all), for the INgroup's self interest (it's also useful to keep subordinates around to do the menial labor). Even the less ruthless of these "imperialistic" entities such as the United States have a outstanding record. The native Americans can pay witness.
Not to mention what we do to animals. I read during just Superbowl Sunday 500 million chickens are slaughtered for the delight of eating chicken wings in the living room. If animals are nonconscious entities that don't suffer akin to robots then no harm no foul, but that is quintessential mass-scale devouring of another.
Both you and the parent could be correct. I see a lot of spurious speculation in various forms but only certain speculation is more likely to get downvoted. Case in point the speculation surrounding the motivations of some unknown anonymous poster downvoting the grandgrandparent based off of extrapolating from other downvotes elsewhere.
I feel similarly. The art is amazing and really sucks you. But that perhaps is it's downfall, overfocus on aesthetics and creativity rather than gameplay. David Jaffe the creator of God of War mentioned that the lead developers of the game were creative people rather than people that have the qualities of finishing things up. Forget his exact words, but that was the gist of it.
Yes. From personal experience I've found people who readily offer "you should" fail to adequately investigate and listen to comphrehend important contextual factors and differing values. These might determine what is situationally positive or negative.
Advice that I've usually found more valuable was formatted as "here's an option and here are the possible pros and cons". These people also did more listening than 'should-ing'. They also didn't have the audacity to tell you what is best, which is implied by 'should', because they weren't in your shoes and neither completely informed of the context so how would they know what's best?
Trick is, to go to archive.vn website or any other equivalent. In second search box copy article url in and click. Sometimes you have to remove unnecessary url query parameters like amp for it to work.
https://archive.vn/Wx7mx
Point accepted.
Yeah technology isn't necessary, but if tech can do the same amount for the same cost removing much of the labor requirement then that's a tremendous win. Additionally the lower the cost the easier it is to append a welfare or socialist cost on the the tax payer's bill. Providing decent food, housing, and some minimal healthcare at 5% of GDP vs 40% of a nations GDP makes a world of difference.
At thresholds of 5% combined with high automation mean such social programs won't be as vehemently contested and their absence might even be viewed as a unnecessary cruelty.
Some mutant hybrid of what the Sihks do in India, and these automations might be interesting:
https://mobile.twitter.com/TechAmazing/status/14397489959166...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byDmDWq7wc8
+ a quick google of food factory gifs/videos
A hybrid mutant that maximizes yield, minimizes cost and labor, if such a permutation is realistic and technology-wise permitting.
Socialism partially generates such an antagonistic response (at least in the USA) because how much of a burden it is on others, Minimize that burden might change the fundamental collective consciousness to how people view what the government should provide.
It's communism that reduces one of the notable downsides of communism, the social loafing aspect, due to reliance on machines instead of your fellow man for productive effort(labor equivalent).
Thank you for taking the time.
Retaliation for reaffirming rights. What a lovely justice system...
Would you mind going into detail about the right violations lawsuit please? I'm very interested in how you had success and what were the specific violations.
I'm very sorry to hear how your life got turned upside down for a victimless felony. Makes me sick we cage people for some fabricated rule invented by some out of touch legislators.
Yup I was detained by a police, where he broke my rib, and in car ride over he nonchalantly said consider myself lucky he wasn't pressing charges for me grabbing him. That itself being a remarkably bold lie.
To expand upon my parents take, according to Peter Zeihan's opinion piece which shows an interesting glimpse into Alberta and its conflicts with other anti-oil vested interests
https://zeihan.com/albertas-tryst-with-destiny/: Alberta oil has constantly been blocked, stalled, and given added friction from leaving Alberta by neighboring territories. Keystone xl pipeline just got axed by Biden and the transmountain pipeline was stalled for years by British Columbia.
Makes me wonder how much of Calgary's downstream economic woes is an attributable result of these upstream anti-oil plays.
Phony Diagnoses not just at nursing homes, also in mental facilities. Was really surprised (better word-traumatized) that one flippant casual mention of not valuing my life in a private text message was enough to to get me detained by police in a facility for a night. "Doctor" threatened me with drugging just because I refused to answer some of their questions and instead insisted on a lawyer. Funny how freedoms can be taken away so dubiously even when not charged of a crime nor arrested in a system that exists outside the criminal system. I'm surprised and not surprised similar behavior happens in nursing homes.
Laws written by the powerful to serve the powerful. That's American plutocratic Justice for yah. Designed intentionally, just like this Google system of contracted companies.
Make's me wonder how in many circle's the narrative can take hold of peoples mind so effectively that it's all free market accredited (and the opposite in other circles). Why (rhetorical question) is it that either capitalism or socialism are optimal (depending on which information fountain one drinks from) is the dominate narrative rather than a more healthy view that tries to optimize a hybrid of these two or a more complex alternative formulation.
So here's a conundrum. People like free discourse, but they also like quality content. Having a quality content safe haven usually involves some tyrannical or mob rule filtering mechanism in the form of weird idiosyncratic rules and policing + banning of offbeat posters. This same filtering mechanism is anti-free discourse. Is there a successful implementation that maximizes free discourse and quality content simultaneously(IE preventing spam, shallow comments, & offtopic stuff which inundate a forum turning it into a maze to find the good stuff) without the bad modding?
Many forums once they reach critical mass even if they aren't heavy handed with policing still have an unsavory softhanded stiff-arming mechanism that's rife with bad [mod/mob] judgement, IE push everything not condoned by the mods or mobs into the place where few read. I'm sorry what I'm trying to describe is hard to put a finger on, but after being on reddit for 10 or more years yah notice some strange consistent peculiarities that are hard to put in words.
He's entitled to more than your average amazon employee, warehouse worker, and probably any other employee: YEAH sure. But I do not agree on paying such a high premium for simply being a decision maker. I'm merely making an argument that it's hard to objectively determine how much more one employee is entitled to the corporations stock pie than another based on merit. Amazon and it's 800,000 employee base built Amazon into the >$1T behemoth it became due simply to the fact one man can't do it alone. A lot of those employees may not have been able to make the important decisions that Jeff Bezos was able to, but they instead contributed blood and sweat. I'm willing to bet even if Jeff Bezos is a super employee, one thousand times more productive and smarter, than the next best employee he still couldn't amass 207 billion himself. By that metric he is overcompensated and others are under.
Not an odd complaint considering he's worth 207 billion. He could more fairly divide that stock wealth among Amazonians. Question is: that 207 billion, did he accumulate that fairly himself or did his workforce accumulate that for him? Hard to answer from the outside but could a single man accumulate 207 billion without help as a corporation of one.
Yeah your right. Whoops!! Sorry my brain misfired when I read your other response. Deepest apologies, im working with low grade human intelligence machinery here. Need to upgrade to super intelligence next time on reincarnation.
Your right, numbers don't show everything and yah just can't redistribute gdp in a communist sort of manner. But I do think one of the parents thinking exercises does indicate that wealth distribution is more of a problem in America than certain European nations.
Capitalism for all it's flaws is a great system to motivate work, wealth creation, and capital investment(as u mentioned).
In an alternative reality fairer system that can muster up a similar work ethic the average person would be better off and you'd have similar innovation potential but with different work ethic driving motivational mechanisms. But that's a improvable hypothetical to be fair. That's your point of contention right?
Yeah influencers aren't the problem but seeing how total productivity improves year by year yet the average wealth of people hasn't just highlights that perhaps we all should be living like influencers.
Perhaps that's partially a problem of expectation alignment but I think it's more a problem of distribution of productivity. Jeff bezos can afford a 500 million yacht cause he and his class of people are hoarding a lion share of the productivity gains that should be more fairly distributed amongst the people.
Homelessness and making money to feed oneself is a significant problem in the world's wealthiest nation. Yet surely we produce more than enough food to feed all of North America. China has also shown the world it can drive construction along to the scale of building 20 to 30 Manhattans in a few decades. Yet the US can't? Why? Something smells rotten I think it's capitalism.
It's only been, what a few hundred years since the industrial revolution began? We haven't given it enough time for the innovators to figure out how to manufacture the needs of society in an overflowing plentiful way that's also automated & low effort. Some things never will be of course.