Software engineering, parenting, cognition, meditation, other
Linkedin, Facebook, Admonymous (anonymous feedback)
Gunnar_Zarncke
Karma: 8,939
Request for help or advice. My fiancé has ordered a Starlink to her home in Kenya. She used the official platform starlink.com and paid with credit card. The credit card was debited (~$600), but nothing happened after that. No confirmation mail, no SMS, nothing. Starlink apparently has no customer support, no email or phone that we can reach. And because we do not have an account, we can not use the single support feature of it either (which is hard enough to find).
I had hoped that the money would be returned if the signup fails, but the order was on the 19th (10 days ago).
Any ideas about how to contact Starlink billing or any Starlink representative?
I think repealing laws is a valid point. I assume you’d not only have to have the enactment of the law postponed, you’d also have add on extra terms that prevent a repealing. Maybe that’s what you mean by “binding contract”. Consider the example of Hunduras’ ZEDEs.
Thank you for the detailed explanation. I understand that the incentives are already to have a maximally well-connected network with nodes between (latency-wise) geographically distant other nodes whenever that is feasible from an interconnect point.
Though thinking about it, it probably means that this burns not only compute but also network traffic.
It’s maybe a bit extreme precaution, but it may be a legit option in some places: This guy keeps a fireproof suit and an air canister at his bed in case of fire:
Nice model!
I notice that the rate of hardware rollout is a constant (preset: 1 year). The discussion about this constant in the documentation is not clear, but to me it seems one thing an AGI would optimize hard against as this is limiting the takeoff speed.
I think you misunderstand my proposal. I don’t want to incentivize being far away. I want to incentivize being close to many different nodes. A Sybil will have difficulty being close to multiple physically separated nodes at the same time.
I think we are talking past each other. I don’t want to defend against Sybil attacks or network partitions. These parts must be solved by different parts of the algorithm. I just want to take the advantages of colocation away and incentivize a homogeneously distributed network overall.
I didn’t mean trying to fake large distances. I meant graph properties that can be computed more efficiently if a randomly chosen large subgraph of the network has low worst-case delay or some other metric that favors graphs that have homogeneously low delays at large.
Does anybody know if consensus algorithms have been proposed that try to reduce centralization by requiring quick coordination across large parts of the network, i.e., it doesn’t work well to have machines only in one place?
For me, four-wheeler means four wheels like those on an office chair. The suitcase stays vertical and is directed by the pull-out grip. Two-wheeler means two fixed wheels, and you pull the suitcase angled 45° on a somewhat longer pull-out grip like a cart. The wheels can be the same size, but I also had ones where the two fixed wheels were larger (2x?). Larger wheels are more forgiving of obstacles as people who use both roller skates, scooters, and bicycles know. But even if they are the same size, the ability of the four wheels to go into different directions causes them to budge on small obstacles, while the two fixed wheels necessarily follow you along.
Having used both, I can confirm that the four-wheelers require smoother surfaces and any small obstacle requires some small conscious effort, while two-wheelers are much more forgiving of obstacles.
I think there are many jokes that do not depend on low or high stakes but work purely on the unexpected situation conjured in the joke. Good examples are puns and play of words, which are quite common in Germany (though many puns involve readings that have different levels of danger/stake that’s not required).
I see two readings out:
The ambiguity between the two readings and the associated flaw in the model is what is detected. Arousal is downstream of this detection.
The ambiguity is detected in terms of how much the steering system predictions fluctuate during a short time. All frames will necessarily predict at least slightly different ground truth and maybe if the cosine (or whatever other vector difference measure) is large enough, it counts. Fluctuation between arousal and non-arousal would drive the cosine high even if other dimensions wouldn’t change much.
Both parties take some time to reach some mutual understanding of what the architecture is. Or at least build some intuition about what kind of architecture the other has in mind or what changes to perform in that architecture. This is a common pattern that I have seen a few times. I have heard that this is called typical in pre-paradigmatic fields. There is not enough standard terminology for common patterns or constraints. Or alternatively, there are not enough concrete implementations to point to or to be able to write down quickly. It would have been much easier if johnswentworth had been able to refer to a “Shah representation of the concept of human value” or a “the 2nd order Byrnes search process neuron hull” (all made up) and say “let’s Yud-chain the Byrnes hull to the Shah”. And then the discussion would have been whether the 2nd order Byrnes converges faster than the Yud-chain diverges or something. But we are not there and it shows.
[Linkpost] Contra four-wheeled suitcases, sort of
Some non-AI answers:
Goal Misgeneralization: The Great Leap Forward in China (1958-1962). The goal was rapid industrialization and collectivization, but it was misgeneralized into extreme policies like backyard furnaces and grain requisitions, which led to catastrophic human and economic losses.
Deceptive Alignment: The Trojan Horse in ancient mythology. The Greeks deceived the Trojans into thinking the horse was a gift, leading to the fall of Troy.
Deceptive Alignment 2: Ponzi schemes. Madoff aligned his apparent goals of high returns with investors’ financial objectives, only to later reveal a fraudulent scheme that led to catastrophic financial loss for many.
Specification Gaming: “Robber barons” in the 19th-century U.S., exploiting lax regulations to create monopolies.
Specification Gaming 2: The subprime mortgage crisis of 2008. Financial institutions exploited poorly specified risk-assessment models and regulations, leading to a global financial crisis.
Power-Seeking: The rise of totalitarian regimes like Nazi Germany. The initial goal of national rejuvenation was perverted into a catastrophic power-seeking endeavor that led to millions of deaths and global conflict.
Self-Preservation: The Cuban Missile Crisis (1962). Both the U.S. and the Soviet Union were seeking to preserve their national security, nearly leading to nuclear war.
Self-Improvement: The arms race during the Cold War. Both the U.S. and the Soviet Union sought to improve their military capabilities, leading to dangerous levels of nuclear proliferation.
I agree. I was also about to post a reply along these lines. The key point is visibility. It already helps that the search lists wiki pages first, but I’d like
linking to related wiki pages at the top as sketched by gears to ascensio above
maybe unifying wiki pages and tags, making it easier to link to wiki pages
allowing discussions on wiki pages
showing recent edits or comments to wiki pages in the /allPosts page
Out of distribution ideas:
more karma for wiki pages and wiki page edits or linking to wiki pages
linking from corresponding pages on Wikipedia
Related: Quite some people seem to have this problem, see e.g. here: https://starlinkforum.net/topic/507-not-receiving-confirmation-email/
One of the advice out there is to write a Starlink Customer Complaint Email to starlinkresolutions@spacex.com, which we did. We didn’t hear back from them.
So, I have tried all the usual advice. Any creative solutions?