Are you also against online banks?! Or are you somehow only hoping for advancements in hacking that breaks confidentiality but not integrity?
Sune
Karma: 545
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.
There is a huge amount of computation going on in this story and as far as I can tell not even a single experiment. The end hints that there might be some learning from the protagonists experince, at least it is telling it story many times. But I would expect a lot more experimenting, for example with different probe designs and with how much posthumans like different possible negotiated results.
I can see in the story that it make sense not to experiment with posthumans reactions to scenarios, since it might take a long time to send them to the fronter and since it might be possible to simulate them well (its not clear to me if the posthumans are biological). I just wonder if this extreme focus on computation over experiments is a delibrate choice by the author or if it was a blind spot of the author.
An alternative reason for building telescopes would be to recieve updates and more efficient strategies for expanding found after the probe was send out.
How did this happen?! I guess not by rationalists directly trying to influence the pope? But I’m curious to know the process leading up to this.
What does respect mean in this case? That is a word I don’t really understand and seems to be a combination of many different concepts being mixed together.
This is also just another way of saying “willing to be vulnerable” (from my answer below) or maybe “decision to be vulnerable”. Many of these answers are just saying the same thing in different words.
My favourite definition of trust is “willingness to be vulnerable” and I think this answers most of the questions in the post. For example it explains why trust is a decision that can exist independently from your beliefs: if you think someone is genuinely on your side with probability 95%, you can choose to trust them, by doing something that benefit you in 95% of cases and hurt you on the 5% of cases, or you can decide not to, by taking actions that are better in the 5% of cases. Similar for trusting a statement about the world.
I think this definition comes from psychology, but I also found it useful when talking about trusted third parties in cryptography. Also in this case, we don’t care about the probability that the third part is malicious, what matters is that you are vulnerable if and only if they are malicious.
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.