I just like bears, know a little bit, and think they’re getting fucked over in many parts of the US. I definitely wasn’t finding fault with a joke.
If you tried to scritch a wild cat you might just get away with it for awhile. But, you’re never getting that hand back :)
I know it’s just a joke. But, black and brown bears are very intelligent and quite peaceful creatures. I’ve run into forty or fifty in the wilderness. I’ve never once felt the bear was considering an attack. They’re smart enough to recognize our complex behaviors as a large risk to their safety.
The story of the vast majority of humans mauled by bears:
Your dog has a perfect record of defending the pack. Every single time the target either runs or turns out to be friendly. No other pack member defends. Its primary reason to exist is to defend. A bear has a perfect record of fights with anything but another bear.
One day the bear smells some food, good stuff it can’t find normally. It’s some campers with their dog. The dog smells the bear, full adrenaline drops for its whole reason to exist, and defends the pack. The bear wins in about one second.
The human defends the dog. The bear fights because that’s what it’s doing right now. Then, it reconsiders and runs away. Finally, the Forest Rangers track down and kill the bear quietly, preserving the tourism the community relies on.
We’re really shitty to bears, at least here in the US. They’re not even very dangerous relative an wild elk, moose, or even free range livestock. It’s the big and dumb ones you need to watch out for. And marmot. Never disagree with a marmot.
deleted by creator
I’m not actually asking for good faith answers to these questions. Asking seems the best way to illustrate the concept.
Does the programmer fully control the extents of human meaning as the computation progresses, or is the value in leveraging ignorance of what the software will choose?
Shall we replace our judges with an AI?
Does the software understand the human meaning in what it does?
The problem with the majority of the AI projects I’ve seen (in rejecting many offers) is that the stakeholders believe they’ve significantly more influence over the human meaning of the results than exists in the quality and nature of the data they’ve access to. A scope of data limits a resultant scope of information, which limits a scope of meaning. Stakeholders want to break the rules with “AI voodoo”. Then, someone comes along and sells the suckers their snake oil.
deleted by creator
I do not think that life will change for the better without an assault on the Establishment, which goes on exploiting the wretched of the earth. This belief lies at the heart of the concept of revolutionary suicide. Thus it is better to oppose the forces that would drive me to self-murder than to endure them. Although I risk the likelihood of death, there is at least the possibility, if not the probability, of changing intolerable conditions. This possibility is important, because much in human existence is based upon hope without any real understanding of the odds. Indeed, we are all ill in the same way, mortally ill. But before we die, how shall we live? I say with hope and dignity; and if premature death is the result, that death has a meaning reactionary suicide can never have. It is the price of self-respect.
Revolutionary suicide does not mean that I and my comrades have a death wish; it means just the opposite. We have such a strong desire to live with hope and human dignity that existence without them is impossible. When reactionary forces crush us, we must move against these forces, even at the risk of death. We will have to be driven out with a stick.
We’re living in a late stage capitalistic hellhole and you’re advocating faith in the free market.
What. The. Fuck.
deleted by creator
Monopolies don’t care about the user experience, only profit. The AI doesnt understand the former, only the latter. The continued degredation of the user experience is a likely indicator of an increase in revenue as function of successful application of AI.
At that point one should should buy the gas blowback replica that the manufacturer licensed for airsoft. It’ll have identical wright and balance, the trigger can usually be tuned to match, and it’ll dry fire with about half recoil. It’ll plink on target at 40’ once the hop-up is calibrated. Should be a modest $150-250 for common Glock, Sig, etc.
It prioritizes profits over human needs.
Yes.
How we change is somewhat undefined. We’ve many diverse examples from history. Our side is the ideological underdog. Flexibility and diversity are two of our greatest strengths.
The majority always chooses an authoritarian king, to let another decide for them in convenience in a paradigm as old as humanity. Critical to our collective ideological success is development of individual wisdom, that more individuals choose to learn and reason for themselves.
The core goals originated in FDR’s 1944 Second Bill of Economic Rights, a proposed successor to The New Deal. It’s been a third party platform for eighty years, including Sanders.
How to pay for it originated in Eisenhower’s 1961 farewell address, where he defined and warned of the military-industrial complex. His predictions were in late stages (Reagan’s nukes) in twenty five years. In 1990 perhaps the way to pay was to cut defense budget by half by 2000. But, by then the corruption likely ran too deep, as evidenced by the subsequent reckless deregulation of banks by both Democrats and Republicans (partial repeal of Glass-Steagall, Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act).
We’re thirty five years past 1990. Banks own everything. Puppet kings are common. And, the Internet may have fundamentally changed communication and relationships so much that we could be past an “event horizon” of our Great Filter event. Belief in such a death perhaps makes it easier to cope with the fight.
I’ve certainly lost the thread of my purpose. I hope there’s something of value for you here.
Crypto would at least offer a non-zero chance of ROI.
Your question is good. You’re missing understanding of time dilation and frame of reference. An explanation of the theory of relativity is at least pages long.
The first book I ever read on the subject, and IMO the best introductory text for any non-physiscist, is Stephen Hawking’s “A Brief History of Time”. But, any introduction to relativity should answer your question.
Assuming you’re coming from a linear programming and OOP background, then data (incl. SQL) kinda sucks because it’s not always clear how to apply existing concepts. But, doing so is absolutely critical to success, perhaps more so than in most OOP environments. Your post isn’t funny to me because I’d be laughing at you, not with you.
If a variable is fucked, the first questions you should answer are, “Where’d it come from?” and “What’s its value along the way?”. That looks a lot different in Python than SQL. But, the troubleshooting concept is the same.
If object definitions were replaced by table/query definitions in planning then you’d probably not have made the initial error. Again, it looks different. But, the concept is the same.
There’s an incredible story behind it. But, the short form is that Proton is more expensive because they’re not harvesting your private information. In a few months the law will prevent them from doing for as long as the core fiscal law and Proton exist (at least decades).