It does not give a counterexample. It specifies a way that you could find a counterexample if there was a halting oracle. But if there was a halting oracle there wouldn’t be any counterexample. So what is found is a contradiction.
tut
Karma: 1,200
We wouldn’t have kept cats either if they didn’t naturally hang around our granaries helping us with our rodent problems.
Ok, the answer to OPs question is that action flick “clones” are not possible with near future technology, and most likely making them (with Drexlerian nanotech or something) is strictly more difficult than just fixing your present body. Your real world clone would take 20 years to “make” and be a separate person, like you would be if you grew up when they did.
You might be ironing the parts in the wrong order, or getting the freshly ironed part under something. But the first thing I would try in your position is to just iron every part of the shirt and hang it up for a while, and then see if the wrinkles go away again. Often wrinkles that come about right after ironing are much softer than the ones that you remove by ironing.
If you don’t adjust for DST and what part of your timezone you are in it will be off by something like 30 degrees. If you need better than that the adjustments are not very hard (The 80⁄20 in most places being to just subtract one hour from what the clock shows because of DST).
Calibration for single questions doesn’t make any sense. Calibration applies to individuals, and is about how their subjective probability of being right about questions in some class relates to what proportion of the questions in that class they are right about.
The historic basis of relationships was for procreation and child rearing purposes. In the future I expect that to not be the case. either with designer-babies, or just plenty of non-natural birthing solutions as to make the next generation make-able without needing to go through a regular-family structure.
How is this relevant? All these technologies are for producing embryos. You still need people to raise the children the same as before. And I would be very surprised if child-raising AI isn’t sex-bot complete (ie if we didn’t thoroughly decouple sex from human relationships long before we decouple child rearing from human relationships.
Scott introduced the concept of a motte and bailey doctrine on Slate Star Codex, in an article called Social Justice and Words Words Words or something like that. I don’t think he said anything that was wrong in that post (about that concept), but it appears that a lot of readers who hadn’t heard about M&BDs before misunderstood it to be about a debate tactic/fallacy. So on SSC and to some extent on LW ‘motte and bailey’ is often used with the meaning ‘bait and switch’.
What is Omnilibrium? What are these links about? If this comment is a reply to something or making a point, what?
A doctrine is something like a rule or principle or concept. The point is that when you claim that something is a motte and bailey doctrine you don’t just attack one argument, but rather the whole body of thought that argues about that thing using those concepts.
Not the motte and bailey argument, a motte and bailey doctrine. But yeah, it sounds a lot like what is called a motte and bailey doctrine everywhere except in the Scottosphere.
This would also increase the number of Staphylococcus relative to other bacteria in the ground. And these bacteria can transfer DNA to each other, including resistance genes. So many of your added bacteria would turn into MRSA, and if there is enough antibiotics in the environment to maintain the MRSA prevalence without your intervention, then you just might end up increasing the amount of MRSA in the region.
Soil bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus, are already everywhere. I don’t see how spreading more of them would reduce the old ones.
Click on the little envelope icon in the lower right corner of the comment that you want to see replies from.
The soap keeps more or less constant density as it sinks, but the water is denser the deeper you go. And the density of soap is really close to that of water, so I expect that there is some depth at which the soap has the same density as the water, and when it gets to that level it stays there. And eventually it dissolves or gets eaten.
On the other hand, a pair of dress shoes and a suit might still be more expensive, and might get ruined when you save somebody from a pool of mud.
You are allowed to ask in the open thread. I don’t think having it more often would help. The SQ thread is for things that you are embarrassed or afraid to ask elsewhere. Apparently some people have questions that they didn’t bring up before the first stupid questions thread.
Only with radar and sonar. And only incidentally.
I think that the point is just to be able to talk about the thing that people mean when they talk about somebody being narcissistic, which generally is not the clinical diagnosis.
{All possible proofs} has infinitely many elements longer than zero, so your algorithm will (might) run forever on some programs that do halt, so it is not a halting oracle.