Old man 1: Life is one trouble after another. I’d be better off dead, better yet, I wish I was never born
Old man 2: True, true, but who has such luck ?.. maybe one in a thousand.
My blog: https://cerebralab.com
I’m also building an open source generic ML library: https://github.com/mindsdb/mindsdb & https://github.com/mindsdb/lightwood …. which I guess might be of interest to some people here
how much protection would allowing children that have at-home parents to stay at home and only come to school optionally for recess to play with other kids give you? A lot more
What’s the chance that the whole medical research apparatus in the US is corrupt and the vaccine numbers are off? That’s the bit that might be underlying Rogan’s model which he’s not spelling out, that leads to “I don’t trust statistics”
Is it 1% ? 10%? 20%? 90%? If so the unkown-unkowns of a vaccine become very high.
Given that it’s widely accepted both Russia and China have faked their data, given that he knows people which had issues that were not reported, given previous failures of the health system during the pandemic.
It seems to me that Joe (and most Americans) are irrational for even considering getting vaccinated.
I for one am to deep down into “assume science in the west is generally not corrupt” rabbit hole, if a large % of data in hard science studies were faked my whole world would collapse so I might as well bet on that, most people here are in that camp, but Joe isn’t.
Also Joe isn’t able to decouple “public policy” from “scientific consensus”, neither are most people, even I or most people here can’t. Like, I have a few good heuristics like “If it’s a simple statistical analysis and the author shared the data with a bunch of people that replicated and n is very high then it’s ok” (ala vaccine studies), or “if it’s a metaanalysis from cochren then I trust it”, but those are less than rational heuristics and I have no idea how an MMA fighter could reach them or why he’d care.
On the whole Joe’s response to the pandemic was on-point, I’d be surprised if he’ll change his mind past “a lot of people think otherwise so let’s meet in the middle”. Because that’s the rational view based on his (rather dumb and scientifically illiterate) PoV.
I don’t disagree, as I said before, I’m focused on problem type not method.
The fact that human mimicking problems have loads of cheap training data and can lead to interesting architectures is something I didn’t think of that makes them more worthwhile.
Hmh, I didn’t want to give the impression I’m discounting particular architectures, I just gave the boosting example to help outline the target class of problems.
The main issue with surveillance is the same AI vs automation issue.
Once the population is fine with being tracked 24⁄7 and you have the infrastructure for it:
The need to do so diminishes
You can just make it illegal to not carry a wifi-enabled ID (there’s the issue of having someone elses IDs, but so is there the issue of face-covering, and finding incentives to force people into else’scarrying only your own ID is easy)
I think I was wrong in writing this, and I corrected it on my blog.
What I mean to say was closer to “human mimicking CV” (i.e. classification, segmentation, tracking and other images → few numbers/concepts tasks). There’s certainly a case to be made that image-as-input and/or output techniques as a whole have very large potential, even if not actualized
Looking forward to seeing projects that come out of this, the LW UX is certainly the most impressive thing about it and one of the few examples of “modern web design” done well that I’ve seen.
Not being remote seems really weird given the economics of it, but to each their own, I guess.
In sexual reproduction there would be a large pool of correct copies out there and at some point these would be swapped back into this line. With cloning the information is lost for all descendants until random mutation recreates it.
I think I get your point here, though I think this assumes a lot about how much cross-over mechanisms can actually “detect” genetic damage.
If this damage can mostly be detected only once the organism is mature enough to be selected for/against by “environment” then I think that kind of goes back into the “red queen” style theory that I’m a fan of (i.e. “hidden traits” that occasionally manifest in the population instead of dying out)
If this damage can mostly be detected at cross-over time or when the organism is still very young or in the germ cells themselves… then I’d expect this is also the kind of damage that won’t be present in germ cells to being with, or not in many because there’s already intra and inter cellular mechanisms to correct for this by inducing apoptosis in the damaged cell.
But maybe I’m missing something and I don’t understand the finer details of cross over well enough.
How so? single-chromosome mutations can account for all variations one gets from the opposite sex, bad configurations can be selected against inside the germinal cells themselves or when the new organism is just a clump of a few thousand cells, which is how most “really bad” configurations get selected against in sexual organisms too.
having pairs of chromosomes and crossover are sufficient to resolve it
One is genes your (adult) partner has that are different from yours. The other is additional de novo mutations in your partner’s gametes.
Neither of which are guaranteed to yield viable offspring, the latter won’t carry all or maybe any of the benefits when mixed with your genes. Indeed, chances are most won’t.
On the other hand just getting random mutation on a constant set of genes seems like it has a much higher chance of still yielding a viable combination.
The former has already undergone strong selection, because it was part of one (and usually many) generations’ worth of successfully reproducing organisms
How many generations of reproduction do you get in-absentia of recombination with other lineages between they are no longer compatible sexually? The answer varies based on the mutation rate, but it boils down to “surprisingly few”.
A lineage getting a new mutation often results in speciation.
Also, see, most mammals mate with individuals on average 1 to 10 generations removed from them with few exceptions in rather “primitive” animals.
Selecting through many generations of gametes, like (human) sperm do, isn’t good enough; it doesn’t filter out bad mutations in genes that aren’t expressed in sperm cells.
Why? The vast majority of potential children in most mammals die because of structural issues that are “detected” very early on (i.e. at the stage when they are still a clump of cells). One reason why old animals become infertile even if germinal cells are still present.
Could this mechanism not do any better?
More importantly, I think you’re missing the point when I say “in some species the vast majority of resources go towards mate selection”. Get rid of that and allow every individual to reproduce and you’d get the ability to have many more offsprings to “test” stuff in.
Lateral gene transfer might be as good as sex, but I don’t see how higher mutation rates can compete. I believe that empirically, mutations that weaken one of the anti-mutation DNA preservation mechanisms in gametes are usually deleterious and are not selected.
Some bacteria and archaea do little to not LGT, many viruses don’t either. They have been here for potentially billions of years and will likely outlive.
The same can be said for many plants that reproduce mainly via cloning.
If you want to take a homo-centric POV and assume we are the end-all-be-all of biological life, fine, but even then you ought to keep in mind that sex might not be a requirement for that. Other strategies exist, and they don’t involve sexual reproduction, the fact they did not evolve us may be chance
At any rate, I think your view might be mostly right, but it’s not the view I was arguing against. But I think you’re still missing the point if you have any reasonable certainty this explains sex in a satisfactory (see my reply for why). But you can be mostly right and still miss most things that are interesting, critical, give predictive power and best describe a phenomenon.
Sex being stable i.e. lack of gender switching or hermaphrodites in most animals (with exceptions ala snails).
Also, the recombinant benefits seems like they could also come by via increased varrisnce from e.g. mutation and ‘survival of the fittest’ style mechanism.
Hmm, I did this by default for a while (gave up TV 10 years ago, vidyogames 5, news and YouTube ~3).
What I discovered last year is that there’s certainly a thing I’m “missing out on” by doing this, in that (dumb) movies/cartoons/yt-videos can help with neurosis in particularly bad periods, and I tentatively reintroduced them for short period every few months, in all cases I did this when I was really sick (as in, physical injuries)
So I do think there’s a point where renouncing all media can backfire.
Also I’m torn if e.g. less wrong, reddit, Twitter, hacker news and certain blogs count. Currently I have a blocker that only allows them 30min/12 hours.
On the one hand I procrastinate and they throw a lot of harmful memes at me, on the other hand I find the conversations potentially useful and they fill the day in a way I enjoy.
Also note:
For YouTube you can use Firefox with the background play addon and unlock+ a YouTube blocker addon and a subscription list to music channels to skip the issue of recommendations.
For Facebook you can use messenger.com and the messenger lite app to turn it into a 100% messaging app with no social media element.
Given the alarmist and uninformed nature of LW’s audience, it might be wise to demand the source code (in this case none, pressumably and API was used) and methodology used to generate any such content.
In this case it seems kind of obvious the author either wrote both sides and/or cherry picked a lot. All fun and games, but you have an AGI death cult going here and this kind of thing can be fodder for false beliefs that stochastic parrots are infinitely more powerful than what’s experimentally proven thus far.
Tangential but: sorry to hear about the nerve endings damage thing :/ I got something like that because I made the (in hindsight potentially dumb) move to pull out a wisdom tooth and adjecent tooth.
Dentist was not the best and the tug fucked up a nerve.
Not as bad as your case, but occasionally it gives a very “creepy” feel and a bit of pain.
What I can stay is that being mindful to the pain always seems to drive it away, this doesn’t work with other types of pain. So unlikely but if you can’t find anything else, it might be worth a shot to see if close examination can “cure” it.
Humanity is misdiagnosing infectious diseases. Statistically speaking you have a few dozen HPVs and say 0.7 HSVs infecting you. Like, permanently, your immune system can’t destroy them, they lay dormant in immunno-privileged areas.
How many other viruses do we misdiagnose as “not there” when really they just act in an undetectable way? hundreds? thousands? millions? I don’t think there’s a good estimate out there
Bacteria and fungi that cause superficial infections enough to an immune reaction to leaving you with localized genetic and structural damage?
Like yeah, the cause of death is now more vague, it’s because the guy was fat and had tumors, and part of being fat and having tumors is just the way the human degrades… but to think that none of it is caused by the trillions of organisms that enter your body every day and our body’s reaction to it? I find that unlikely.
It’s just that we eliminated all “obvious” infectious disease, but even that will not stay as is. The current prevention measures are just an evolutionary pressure and it’s combined with all of us no longer being selected based on our ability to react to infectious disease. I think it’s not unreasonable to predict an uptik in this is the trans hummanist future comes to pass, and if it does, then it will be a long time before we’re rid of deadly disease, even if the signal is now weaker and more confounded.
32:35 for me, 30:55 is just a 2 min long ad
Precisely, the mask thing keeps the tourturous forced herding and makes it even worst, it’s inhumane.