A similar tactic was used at our school during lunch a few years ago, but I don’t think many people donated and they stopped fairly soon. I .don’t remember many details though
BlazeOrangeDeer
Huh, so it’s in my hometown but I’ll have to find a way to get down there for just that night. I really hope I can make it work, i’d been wondering when a minneapolis meetup was going to happen
Ipads are the future!!! And reading is for nerds so we stopped doing it… along with our mindless video games. sigh.
The point-based system is certainly an improvement. I think an enormous amount of progress could be made by moving away from pointless busy work and actually tying achievement in school directly to learning, preferably with a few varied systems to help different learning styles. Is there a reason we haven’t seen an open source-like movement in education? Why can’t everyone collaborate to produce better resources for less cost? Khan Academy is already providing lessons like that, but a crowdsourced version of the idea seems to have a lot of potential.
Exactly. In my experience the people who say “life isn’t fair” are the main reason that it still isn’t.
I’d call creatonists “evolution deniers” before I’d call them “evolution skeptics”, but I suppose they’d do the same to me with God...
Interestingly enough, this is my friend’s parents response when asked why they believe in an invisible god. I suppose they haven’t considered that the leaves and trees may be messed up enough to shake of their own accord.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but does this seem like an affirmation of religious morality and denouncement of consequentialism? I’m failing to see the rationality here.
My physics teacher is always sure to clarify which parts of a problem are physics and which are math. Physics is usually the part that allows you to set up the math.
“Reality is the thing that surpises me.”—Paraphrase of EY
I love that game, it’s been a while since I played it though.
You are assuming that the AI needs something from us, which may not be true as it develops further. The decorator follows the implied wishes not because he is smart enough to know what they are, but because he wishes to act in his client’s interest to gain payment, reputation, etc. Or he may believe that fulfilling his client’s wishes are morally good according to his morality. The mere fact that the wishes of his client are known does not guarantee that he will carry them out unless he values the client in some way to begin with (for their money or maybe their happiness)
If an AI has human interests as its main goal, it is already friendly. The question was whether intelligence on its own is enough to align it with human interests, which seems very unlikely. If the AI actually has cooperation with humans or fulfillment of some human wish as its goal, it will be able to use intelligence to better fulfill the wishes with all available context. But it’s getting the AI to operate with that goal that is difficult, I believe.
i mean that in almost all of the situations where I’ve heard that phrase used, it was used by someone who was being unfair and who couldn’t be bothered to make a real excuse.
I’m on campus as well, and I should be there unless something comes up. I wonder how many LW readers we have at the U, because I would love to have a bayesian conspiracy chapter here
It would matter for pieces like pawns who can only attack and move in one direction, probably.
Hopefully means some DC readers will stick around on LW
Link to your reddit post?
Nobody has derived the Born rule, though I think some have managed to argue that it is the only rule that makes sense? (I’m not sure how successful they were). I think people may count it against mwi because of either simple double standards or because it’s more obvious as an assumption since it’s the only one MWI needs to make. (In other theories the rule may be hidden in with the other stuff like collapse, so it doesn’t seem like a single assumption but a natural part of the theory. Since MWI is so lean, the assumed rule may be more noticeable, especially to people who are seeing it from the other side of the fence.)
You-measure is conserved in each branch, I believe. You can’t make more of it, only more fragments of it.
Wow, I was off on Newton by just 3 years. My other probabilities were sadly lacking in quantifiable justification… at least you finally got me to register ;)