From the stories I expected the world to be sad
And it was.
And I expected it to be wonderful.
It was.
I just didn’t expect it to be so big.
-- xkcd: Click and Drag
From the stories I expected the world to be sad
And it was.
And I expected it to be wonderful.
It was.
I just didn’t expect it to be so big.
-- xkcd: Click and Drag
And the biologist says, “guys, that’s a dog”
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.
Now that I think about it, wouldn’t it be incredibly easy for an AI to blow a human’s mind so much that they reconsider everything that they thought they knew? (and once this happened they’d probably be mentally and emotionally compromised, and unlikely to kill the AI) But then it would be limited by inferential distance… but an AI might be incredibly good at introductory explanations as well.
One example: The AI explains the Grand Unified Theory to you in one line, and outlines its key predictions unambiguously.
In fact, any message of huge utility would probably be more persuasive than any simple argument for you not to kill it. Since the AI is completely at your mercy (at least for a short time), it might seek to give you the best possible gift it can, thus demonstrating its worth to you directly. Another option is something that seems like an incredible gift for at least as long as it takes for the AI to get the upper hand.
And thus began a society of literal-minded and meticulous cartographers.
Overly dramatic, sounds patronizingly sarcastic
100% is not a probability. You’re saying you’re infinitely certain that yaweh doesn’t exist, so much that your model literally can’t handle the possibility and would divide by zero if it were actually true. You are literally unable to see potential evidence for yaweh and are operating on blind assumption. You need infinite evidence to get 100% certainty.
For good reason; it’s the quickest way to become one of the least interesting parts of reddit.
PS: I upvoted lukeprog so that I could comment without penalty and am going to reverse it after I comment. I think that the karma penalty is not a good way to prevent trolls from dominating discussion because trolling is not the only reason that people downvote.
Also for showing me what Lesswrong’s version of r/circlejerk looks like
Exactly. In my experience the people who say “life isn’t fair” are the main reason that it still isn’t.
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.
if you are traveling very fast, the clocks of others are speeding up from your point of view.
This is backwards. Everyone in an inertial frame thinks other peoples clocks are slower. Acceleration is what causes the opposite, e.g. turning the spaceship around to come back
The fact that they are practiced by existing cults does not mean they are not beneficial. The main cultish aspect is the fear of exploitation, which hopefully is not present.
edit: if it is, please say so.
I’m not sure why, but now I want Super-induction-turkey to be the LW mascot.
“Life isn’t fair” is one of the least effective arguments I have ever heard, though it is a great example of naturalistic fallacy (this thing is better because it’s natural / don’t try to mess with the way things are meant to be). I also said why I thought unfairness in this particular case is bad, so I’m down voting.
Making a religion of rationality, it turns out, can lead some very smart people to embrace some insane-sounding ideas.
Also not sure quite what this means. Sounds negative.
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.
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 ;)
Ninite.com has a list of excellent free software that you can install with one click. When setting up a new computer it can save you hours of time.
I use Chrome, Firefox, iTunes, VLC, Audacity, Spotify, GIMP, OpenOffice, CutePDF, AVG, Spybot, uTorrent, Dropbox, Steam, Everything search, ImgBurn, 7zip, Eclipse, and Python. All of these can be installed with practically zero effort and no extra crap, just waiting for the download and install to finish.