makoConstruct

You didn't need to make this claim about driving. Coding requires robust metacognition. Driving doesn't, it can be drilled repetitively, and it also benefits from having superhuman senses and instant reaction times. It's somewhat more amenable to AI.

> I don't have anything against furries

If so, you're probably looking for the "show less of this" feature rather than muting?

When you say "a long time" do you mean 2026, or 2029?

This story is about a blind evolutionary process, not about a general system optimizing a given goal. The crabs aren't even sapient.

How about a legal commitment to open source after a delay? I think this would be a compromise that a lot of companies could accept if it would increase sales today at all.

(Ideally there'd be some way of requiring an immediate release as soon as the company loses the ability to continue maintaining or developing the software, but I'm not sure how you'd formalize that.)

The second article states that Tang Feng (Audrey) is The Digital Minister, and the guy was trying to get to the Digital Department, seemingly in relation to a law against online fraud that they recently passed. He probably would have been happy to shoot other people in the process, but he definitely would have wanted to shoot the leader and public face of that department especially.

General health is still a probable shared cause here, they're going to need to control for more than just socioeconomic class and parental education.

What happens, for instance, if they control for stamina (I'd predict the effect goes away)

I've heard that there's archeological evidence that ancient sapiens engaged in long-distance trade, objects brought to places they shouldn't have been. Nothing like that was found with neanderthals. Not sure if this is due to having fewer samples of neanderthals, nor whether this reflects intelligence or something else (I think Harari or someone may have argued that it might be about eusocial myths enabling coordinating larger armies) but that's one contraindication.

Sounds like they should raise the bond, then?

This is also something Yudkowsky has something interesting to say about

https://arbital.com/p/logical_dt/

Summary: LDT is a decision theory that is able to recognise that the decisions of all agents who implement LDT will be correlated. When it makes a decision it knows that it's making the decision for its entire decision-theoretic equivalence class. If it ever decided to knowingly do a thing that is "individually rational" but collectively disastrous, in cases where the personal cost of the disaster outweighs the personal benefits of defecting, then it would be malfunctioning.

I put quotes around "individually rational" because, in light of LDT, CDT is not really rational. It performs worse. It doesn't win.

And, personally, I don't think the old model of decisionmaking was closer to what humans intuitively consider to be sane, effective decisionmaking, I think we had to be taught to be ruthless parasites who can't keep promises, and I hope we can unlearn that now.

Yo I came across a comment you made a while back asking whether there was a scripting language that does rust-like lifetime checking. That thread's archived now so I have to tell you here, it exists https://github.com/pistondevelopers/dyon I don't really see the point, personally. But you seemed to really want it so

You expected something more esoteric? I think it's a matter of perspective. Sure, as a crypto challenge, it's weak. But if you think of it as our standard UI for configuring one's user icon...

I don't think it's going to be a problem. Before anyone can post anything to merveill.es, they have to figure out how the heck anyone posts anything to merveill.es, which will take some lateral thinking.

WOW my C++ solution is horrible. It's as though I'd just ignored everything I've learned about Doing Things Right in C++ Post 2010. Such is hacking, I guess.