pasquinelli

now if they weren't sanctioned they would've had no reason to do this. classic case of perverse incentives.

> Given the turnover for entertainment in this day and age it doesn't make sense to do all this complex stuff.

are we not talking about the NES?

i'm curious, when you say the traits seem to be grnetic, how is it that they seem that way?

> This is true, but it's important to note in context that they were wrong, and that society is better off on balance given the quality/value available in the modern fashion market. I mean, duh, as it were.

i don't know that. how could one know that? you been to the alternate reality where the luddites won?

i've had similar experiences, but never when i was visiting the dentist on state insurance.

yes, people spoke out, but i take your point. a lot of people seemed cool with it or were even excited for it when they thought it wouldn't effect them, but obviously, if they could get away with it with a subset of the population, that subset would only grow.

i'm shocked at such behavior from the only democracy in the middle east.

i think a lot will fail to hold up when 8 out of 10 people are replaced with ai.

it's a product of its own.

https://www.amazon.com/TurboChef-Electric-Countertop-Microwa...

> No, the point of the example was not to make any specific claim about wages or inflation. The point of the example was to illustrate that wages and inflation are relative. That's it.

i'm sorry but that's just bird-brained

>> They should lift incomes, not suppress prices

> I think this misses the psychology of inflation.

> If wages go up 20%, and prices go up 15%, everyone is better off and got a 5% raise, right?

> Go poll people that experienced that and they won't tell you they're celebrating being 5% richer, they'll tell you they're outraged about the 15% inflation.

> Psychologically they'll believe they earned that 20% raise through hard work. Putting in extra hours to get that promotion. But then the inflation robbed them of their 20% raise, and turned it into a measly 5% raise. They'll be outraged.

how you get from what they said to what you said they said, i have no idea.

as for how real wages have changed overtime, you should be aware that it isn't a straight-forward measurment, and that it is an area of active political contestation.

you can see here: https://www.epi.org/blog/growth-or-not-in-real-wages/

there are ways you can slice it to make things look one way or another. for example, 1979-2017 had almost universal real wage loss for the "some college" demographic.

the point of the example was to illustrate how people fixate on the increased cost of living fron inflation and ignore their increased earnings, even if the increased earnings out-pace the inflation in their cost of living. my point is that's a bad example because we couldn't say that that's true given that the cost od living has been out-pacing wage inflation for a long time.

so yeah, the example illustrates the idea, but it also underlines how the idea contradicts reality.

yeah but it's not a great example, because actually wages aren't going up. maybe people would be able to psychologically handle inflation if it wasn't out-pacing wages. actually, now i think about it, that's not psychological at all, so the whole premise is kind of out the window, isn't it?

everyone who's replied to me has a slightly different idea of what happened, and none of them really fit the claims that have been made by the parties involved, nor do they fit together.

so do you have some kind of inside knowledge about what happened? if so can you give more details about how exactly she improperly used an executive's email? what did she send and to whom, i wonder. and if you don't have any inside information, could you reflect on what motivates you to defend openai here?

low class, low rent, cheap, shit-heel. like, i'm surprised that they either can't afford to have an actual recruiter communicating with job candidates using their own email, or they do such a small amount of recruiting that it doesn't justify it.

i don't know who you're talking to, but i would argue hamas has a right to self-defense against the ongoing genocide that israel is comitting against palestinians. what's happening right now is most important.

chattel slavery was a practice in america for multiple lifetimes, but that doesn't make it a morally uncertain question. israel was established by ethnic cleansing and can only continue to exist by apartheid. it's not a difficult question, it isn't a nuanced issue-- the idea that it is one is simply propaganda.

and that's what it was and not a fact you're imagining right now for the sake of argument? because what i heard is she used an executive's email address improperly, which she says she did for recruiting.

famously, jews aren't allowed in baghdad and never have been. and the palestinians today aren't descendants of jews. and the just thing when a people have been wronged is to wrong the descendants of the people who did the wrong thing, because we're cavemen, that's why i support genocide by native americans against everyone else in north and south america, which i'm sure you support as well.

hamas and hezbollah only exist in response to israeli ethnic cleansing. in light of that the who-started-it question isn't so unclear.

and did you use someone else's email for that?

if she's hiring for her own team why does she need to use someone else's email?

not only is it deceptive but it's also suprisingly podunk of openai to have a "safety researcher" also double as a recuiter. did they have her making coffee and doing dishes too? is "safety researcher" a serious position, or isn't it? i guess i can tell what openai thinks.

it's something people have done many times. obviously not specifically using a bug in lean, but the same kind of error.

but do you know that what was proved is what you want proved. this is the basic problen with formal verification.

so then, if you don't understand the proof, how do you know it's a proof?

i'm confused how it is that no one understands the proofs but still assume they are proofs.

> Who actually considers a loop a branch?

interesting question...

> A loop is a chunk of code that will be run N times depending

oh! turns out you do!

yeah maybe, but regardless you'll still have pretty close to the same load of, like, biomolecular stress that causes aging.

do you live close to italy?

if not, then you must have a lot of money to have visited multiple times.

i bet it wouldn't.

you'd probably get sick on vacation and make your situation worse by obsessing over how you wish you weren't sick, in exactly the same way that you now obsess over how you wish you had more money than you do.

i think you're mixing up psychological stress and cellular stress.

as for psychological stress, you will never have enough of anything, or be free enough from anything, or any combination, to be safe from stress.