Why is 0.1% not being monitored?! Naively, I would expect it to only be around 0.1% extra work. Or is there a reason that the last 0.1% is somehow harder to monitor?
Sune
Karma: 563
Does that mean that the brain itself was simulated, using only info from the brain scan, while other techniques were used for simulating the body and environment?
Was it a specific fruit fly, or a simulation created using data from multiple fruit flies?
Is there any hope/indication that this process can be reverted? For example, has this ever been reverted in a single cell? Or do you think this treatment is only relevant for uploading?
What kind of visa do you need for this? Do plans to use MAiD counts as plans to leave the country?
Assuming you don’t do this until you are terminally ill, what is the chance of having enough time to plan this, rather than needing emergency service?
This comment seems to conflate two different statements.
1 Most of GDP depends of stable goods like steel, concrete and copper wire.
2 Most of GDP is the production of stable goods that almost everything depends on.
What you need for the counter argument to work is point 2 while many of the claims are only supporting point 1.
I dont think 2 is true (if you exclude the production for humans who then provide labor). For example education, healthcare, tourism, retail.
Are you also against online banks?! Or are you somehow only hoping for advancements in hacking that breaks confidentiality but not integrity?
that woman who was jailed longer than the rapists she insulted
I believe this is not an honest description of the case. Even the simple investigation of this, that I did by following the link, suggested that the woman was jailed for a weekend because of a previous theif, and for not attending and court hearing. All the defendants of the rape case got youth sentences of at least a year.
I’m strongly downvoting your post. I hope you understand that this is not because I want to censor your political views, but because I want information on less wrong to not be misleading.
This posts argues that all emotions “makes sense” in some games theoretical sense. I wonder if it is possible to state this clearer and give a game theoretical definition of emotion. If so, it would be interesting to see if there are any “theoretical emotions” that has not been observed in humans.
Just like there are electromagnetic wave lengths we cannot see and gasses we cannot smell, maybe there are game theoretical emotions we cannot intuitively feel.
I use ChatGPT and Claude to try to learn Macedonian, because there is only very little learning material available for that language. For example, they can (with a few errors sometimes) explain grammatical concepts or give me sentences to translate. I have not found a good way of storing a description of my abilities and weaknesses across conversations, but within a conversation they are good at adapting the difficulty of the questions to the quality of my answers.
Unfortunately I’m not aware of any tools that can pronounce or transcribe Macedonian.
Edit: I still do most of my language learning using Anki, Google translate and a book for learning Macedonian. Probably because using LLMs is not sufficiently gamified and because of the small inconveniences having to ask for questions instead of simply doing one exercise after another.
What is the definition of a Dyson Swarm? Is it really easier to define, or just easier to see that we are not there, only because we are not close yet?
That is assuming you live sufficiently long. The point in life insurance is to make sure you leave something for your kids/spouse if you die soon.
Why does the plot start at 3x3 instead of 2x2? Of course, it is not common to have games with only one choice, but for Chicken that is what you end up with when removong one option. You could even start the investigation at 2x1 options.
Retracting the comment because I have seen a couple of couterexamples, including myself!
The alcor-page was not updated since 15th December 2022, where a person who died in August 2022 (as well as later data) was added, so if he was signed up there, we should not expect it too be mentioned yet. For CI latest update was for a patient dying 29th February 2024, but I can’t see any indication of when that post was made.
My point is that potential parents often care about non-existing people: their potential kids. And once they bring these potential kids into existence, those kids might start caring about a next generation. Simularly, some people/minds will want to expand because that is what their company does, or they would like the experience of exploring a new planet/solar system/galaxy or would like the status of being the first to settle there.
Which non-existing person are you refering to?
Beyond a certain point, I doubt that the content of the additional minds will be interestingly novel.
Somehow people keep finding meaning in failling in love and starting a family, even when billions of people have already done that before. We also find meaning in doing careers that are very similar to what million of people have done before or traveling to destination that has been visited by millions of turist. The more similar an activity is to something our ancestors did, the more meaningful it seems.
From the outside, all this looks grabby, but from the inside it feels meaningful.
There has been enough discussion about timelines that it doesn’t make sense to provide evidence about it in a post like this. Most people on this site has already formed views about timelines, and for many, these are much shorter than 30 years. Hopefully, readers of this site are ready to change their views if strong evidence in either direction appears, but I dont think it is fair to expect a post like this to also include evidence about timelines.
I think that wasn’t that clear from the post. I read it as saying that you can have a talent for each of the 4 skills, and that experience with each skill isn’t transferable. Past experience in a skill is only relevant as a proof that you have a talent for that category.