xwkd

I understand the impulse to assume that, but good software can be built with AI (as long as the right verification loops are used), and new maintainers won't necessarily drop their creations once it gets hard.

You very well may be right; development might be easy come, easy go. But maybe not! (Hopefully not, in this case. It looks cool.)

Maybe I’m misunderstanding, but isn’t that what legislators do?

If the problems are solved, wouldn't you rather all those programmers use their productive systems-oriented brains on other problems?

I watched the whole commencement, and it seems that Eric Schmidt himself was booed louder than anything "AI" that came before him in the program. The students had strong reactions to almost every statement he made. If you listen to the other speakers... it's generally positive / calm. The media characterization of this event seems inaccurate, to be generous.

This really is the crux of it. If democracy rules, then power lies with the demos and by extension controlling their windows to the world.

Over the past decade, there's been a lot of regulation forcing Apple to open up their "Apple only" integrated platforms.

It used to be the case that if Apple wanted to build a walled garden / cathedral, then in order to compete in the hardware marketplace they had to provide software that didn't suck. You knew that if you bought an Apple product, there was reasonable assurance that everything was tightly integrated. If it wasn't, you'd go buy a market alternative (Android, PC). In my mind, this means that they spent a lot of time and dev resources (i.e. money) on their Frameworks. I think it showed. Time was spent on design. They focused on opening up capabilities "the right way."

Now that's pointless. If the iPhone is just an Android phone with a different coat of paint, then dev resources are going to be shifted to a place where Apple can distinguish themselves in the market, where they have platforms that they can control: Services.

This is an understandable perception, but it reveals your lack of context. By and large, children in the US are educated in the public school system. Only 6% of children in the US are homeschooled. Now, there has been a relatively recent push into home schooling as a reaction to the education problems that you mentioned, but it is not the cause. I'd encourage you to spend some time researching home schooling outcomes in the US, if you're interested. (Keep in mind that the sample is mainly representative of engaged and proactive parents.)

Critical thinking requires that the sources themselves are evaluated for bias. Anecdotally, I've come across several articles for which the bulk of citations all come from one source, and that source is a heavily political "newspaper" article. This is true for topics that are hot on all sides of whatever spectrum or division they tend to land. If Wikipedia is going to be taught to be used as a tool for research, then its governance structure should be taught and critically evaluated. The bias of the board of the Wikimedia Foundation should be taken into account.

I suspect that the bulk of readers don't give a second thought to Wikipedia's Magisterium.

Yes, let's bring these back. In fact, why don't we just build Khrushchevkas and skip the whole proletarian revolution step? We can even start wearing the funny little hats with flaps and drink until we forget about freedom or dignity. We're beyond that anyway, aren't we?

With this level of wealth inequality and these seeming like a good idea, I'd say we're gearing up for a bloody good time, to say the least.

Galileo and the church were both correct.

It's rare for an app dev (of such a popular tool) to go out of their way to respond to a random forum user. Even rarer is to address every point on their list with patience and consideration.

You must be a remarkable person and I wish you nothing but success.

I'm not even able to hold a candle to Wolfram intellectually- the guy is a universe away from me in that regard. But: Given a cursory look at his wiki page and Cosma Shalizi's review of his 2002 book on cellular automata [1], I feel fairly comfortable saying that it seems like he fell in the logician's trap of assuming that everything is computable [2]:

>There’s a whole way of thinking about the world using the idea of computation. And it’s very powerful, and fundamental. Maybe even more fundamental than physics can ever be.

>Yes, there is undecidability in mathematics, as we’ve known since Gödel’s theorem. But the mathematics that mathematicians usually work on is basically set up not to run into it. But just being “plucked from the computational universe”, my cellular automata don’t get to avoid it.

I definitely wouldn't call him a crackpot, but he does seem to be spinning in a philosophical rut.

I like his way of thinking (and I would, because I write code for a living), but I can't shake the feeling that his physics hypotheses are flawed and are destined to bear no fruit.

But I guess we'll see, won't we?

[1] http://bactra.org/reviews/wolfram/ [2] https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2020/04/how-we-got-here-...

Produced by a Mormon whose dissertation was supervised by an atheist Professor of the Hebrew Bible and Ancient Religion. This may be a data point in favor of the trustworthiness of the podcast, or it may be an argument against, depending on your own personal point of view.

If singular, this definition makes sense. If not, then I have to ask: Independent of what or whom?

Please excuse my understanding as a layman, but could this be related to the electromagnetic absorption spectrum of water?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/18/Absorpti...

It seems that the "green" wavelength that the article cites is exactly where the lowest point of absorption is. Could this suggest that heat is created as a result of electromagnetic resistance? (Like water molecules vibrating as a result of microwave radiation?)

You can suspect whatever you would like. I don't mind.

Your comment is rather disrespectful and yet, if someone tried to shut you up, I would proportionately respond. You have a right to your disrespectful speech.

I wholly disapprove of what you say and will defend to the death your right to say it.

Needs to be played on a CRT in general. For retro games, you can't beat the low latency and fantastic glow of an electron gun. No shader emulation comes close.

> I feel that traffic is much worse since before COVID, drivers more aggressive, etc.

From what I've seen, it seems like people are less afraid of the consequences of bad driving behavior. There's less of a police presence on the roads. I'm not sure why that's the case, but I have a few guesses.

I'm a man and I don't feel particularly lost.

For all that this article had to say, (and it said a lot without saying much), I see us needing two things: Good brothers and good women. We need each other. We really do.

We could probably use some more fraternal organizations. I don't expect your typical Twitch subscriber to join the Loyal Order of Water Buffaloes, but can you imagine the mental health benefit for a lonely young man to join a supportive yet diverse group of peers?

Having a high BMI and a low body fat percentage means that you are likely composed of a lot of muscle weight. I would think that this would correlate highly with physical strength, which I would also think is something we would want for our fighting forces.

I agreed with the parent's sentiments initially. But then I saw your comment before the edit, where you had called this "uneducated loser mentality." I'm sad that you edited it, because you're also right.

>I loved the Tenderloin back then, even though it was terrifying. It was full of weirdos and loonies and junkies and poverty stricken artsy types like me, who had no power or desire in gentrification - we were just poor too. But we embraced where we were and didn't try to change it. The loin changed me far more than my presence changed it - for the better. It taught me compassion and empathy and how to avoid getting knifed by a junkie in the alleyway.

>But we embraced where we were and didn't try to change it.

Poor is fine. It's a hard life, but it's a state of being. Even being artsy and a little crazy; that's great. The rest of it though...? Why romanticize this? It's bad. We shouldn't romanticize bad. Learn your lessons, but let's want something better.

Again, excellent trolling. I commend you.

Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.

This is excellent bait, and I'll take it.

You (hopefully) know as well as I do that twerking with Megan Thee Stallion is more of a "yas queen" than a "does this please you, viewer?"

The thing that takes an ostensibly (lol) enticing sexual act and turns it into an "ewwww" is when it's wrapped up in a big box emblazoned with the letters "POLITICAL POWER PLAY." Oh yes please, that's exactly what I want, serve me some tits and ass with a side of "why are you threatened by strong women?"

I like a hate-fuck as much as the next guy, but I'm kind of tired of being hatefucked by the media industry. To call this stuff propaganda is an insult to propaganda. At least propaganda has to be smart. This is just the writers and artists' daddy issues on full display. We all know it, and this hatred of the simple straight male has infected everything.

Allow me to be an annoying pedant for a moment: Isn't that a bit tautological? The bottom half of the bell curve is below the mean in a normal distribution by definition. There's always going to be a lower half as long as we model statistics.

I agree with you completely. This is the way that it should be. I will also say, then, that I feel like we’re all a bunch of huge pussies. Sounding more like my dad every day. Great.

Curation and censorship are strange cousins, don’t you think?

It seems like it’s only censorship if it’s done with big furnaces and a gun barrel by a man with tiny glasses and creased pants. Governments censor. Corporations curate. Right?

I’m not sure if I even want to dignify the following state of affairs by calling it an open secret, but the US is governed by corporations. I won’t insult you by expounding on this line of reasoning. You see what I’m getting at.

Comedy cannot be offensive to trans people on Twitch, specifically!

Here's the part where I rhetorically taunt with my weaponization of the virtue of free enterprise:

"You have a right to free speech, but I have a right to decide what I allow on my platform!"

Yeah, I don't entirely believe that either. I see the weasel here and so do you.

So I have a right to disregard the value of free speech. But is that really what we want?

It's a particularly responsible man, too. You'd think if they had some kind of insidious demographic agenda they would choose a different contrast. I think the only subtextual story here is the last line:

>"He said that he owed his father for providing him with much of his personal finance knowledge and that friends from families who didn’t talk about money did not have as much financial literacy."

Supporting hardware is pretty much what operating systems are supposed to do. Computation always supports some human end. Humans are doing a lot more with their hardware these days.