ysofunny
when those students enter the workforce, they expect the surveilance. they grew up under chat control so they're used to it. get with the times to live and die another day
time to explore. isn't this HACKER news? get hacking. ffs
...all the way back to pen and paper
it already kinda isn't... but this will be a Telescreen in your pocket. it really already is; but at least for now it's possible to use android and force it open.... but not for long.
next up: government license to open web browser dev tools... but by then it won't matter cuz it'll be 100% web assembly i.e. binary, the actual web 2.0.
each platform having your its own currency? well that's simply one nation. a federal government, registered at the UN. this translates the UN into Etherum, register your currency and be a part of what exactly?
I know insects also have their own microbiomes
it's all part of how there's widely available social media technology and academic graph languages.
of course the government is going to track the citizens, it's all a matter of how, how much, and to what end.
the more I think about it, the more I think this is the core of a rePUBLIC
there's a bunch of private actors, the "citizens" who get together to form the republic, and thereby establish "the public space" aka the commons
it really does seem like we all gonna be using jj soon enough
I recall pijul.org that was another working prototype of better git
and I wonder how much overlap is there in the way they have made the improvements.
yes, I also enjoy trying to answer this question.
what is such an structure even mean? how could it be that simply defining numbers, obersving addition, and generalizing it away into multiplication would yield this natural structure?
It all begins with zero. the predecessor of One, the best known number.
zero can be assumed by anyone. the surprise is how all zeros are the same zero. (by uniqueness of emptyset; but as I hope you can see, I'm a crank. a nutjob. I'll stop
I thought this when watching the 3b1b + ben eater collaboration on quaternion visualizers.
von Neumann would say you'll never grok quaternions. but merely get used to them.
then maths is really THE absolute best description available of language and nature.
but non-mathematical minds will simply wonder and be amazed at how "maths explains the world", a clear indication that somebody is not thinking like a mathematician.
> Whenever there's a mysterious pattern in nature, people have felt the need to assert that some immaterial "thing" makes it so. But this just creates another mystery: what is the relationship between the material and the immaterial realm?
the relationship between the material and the immaterial pattern beholden by some mind can only be governed by the brain (hardware) wherein said mind stores its knowledge. is that conscious agency "God"? the answer depends on your personally held theological beliefs. I call that agent "me" and understand that "me" is variable, replaceable by "you" or "them" or whomever...
oh, and I love (this kind of figurative) digging. but I use my hands no shovels.
the first 2 naturals form an integer.
that integer and a 3rd natural constitute a real (but this 3rd natural best be bigger than zero, else we're in trouble)
what I choose to focus after observing the "unphysical" nature of numbers. is the sense of natural opposition (bordering on alternation) between "mathematical true" and "physical true". both are claiming to be really real Reality.
in the mathematical realm, finite things are "impossible", they become "zero", negible in the presence of infinities. it's impossible for the primes to be finite (by contradiction). it's impossible for things (numbers or functions of mathematical objects) to be finite.
but in the physical reality, it's the "infinite things" which become impossible.
the "decimal point" (i.e. scientific notation i.e. positional numeral systems) is truly THE wonder of the world. for some reason I want something better than such a system... so I'm still learning about categories
ultimately they failed because they wrote such that it didn't matter if other people understood. it's a style that is only intelligible if you already know (from some other experience) what they are describing.
updating is a systemic issue, not a per-project matter
you gotta pay for that. or dig through the academic publisher archives; which you also gotta pay for unless you believe in digital piracy and evil copyright infringement which may or may not fund terrorism
like they used to say: information wants to be expensive so pay to be free
from mitochondrial gradients pushing ions through a hole to make a protein complex spin so to chain double phosphate groups in ADP molecules into triple ATP molecules thereby storing energy.
all the way up to an international entities controlling flows of goods and people across borders with the goal of maximizing corporate and government profits (storing/collecting energy)
i.e. utilizing the energetic gradient caused by citizens and people and families trying to meet each other across the border including sending each other goods, flavors, candies, etcs
for example, lambda calculus, it's too simple. to the point that it's real power is immediately unbelievable.
the simplest 'solution', is to make it "sacred", to infuse an aura of mystery and ineffability around the ideas. that way people will give it the proper respect proportional to the mathematical elegance without necessarily having to really grasp the details.
I'm reflecting on how, for example, lambda calculus is really easy to learn to do by rote. but this does not help in truly grasping the significance that even LLM can be computed by (an inhuman) amount of symbol substitutions on paper. and how it is easy to trivialize what this really entails (fleshing out all the entailment is difficult; it's easier to act as if they have been fleshed out and mimic the awe)
therefore, rationalist cults are the legacy, the latest leaf in the long succession of the simplest solution to the simplicity of the truly sacred mathematical ideas with which we can "know" (and nod to each other who also "know") what numbers fucking mean
specially given its only backing is "trust" (trust that you won't get invaded or overthrown)
anonymous alt coins, real digital cash, are competition to the monetary system. there can be only one.
the internet was made to happen. and that is what happened.
I would say I have seen 3 completely different internets. and I started keeping track in the late 90s after the dotcom boom made it truly global and everywhere
sooner or later command line interfaces will require background checks and be limited to a close select group of government approved individuals, e.g. like guns in japan.
is how to "manually" (semi-manually) tweak the LLMs parameters so we can alter what it 'knows for sure'
is this doable yet??? or is this one of those questions whose answer is best kept behind NDAs and other such practices?