AbouBenAdhem @ AbouBenAdhem @lemmy.world

Posts

8

Comments

1,569

Joined

2 yr. ago

The current, extravagantly wasteful generation of AIs are incapable of original reasoning. Hopefully any breakthrough that allows for the creation of such an AI would involve abandoning the current architecture for something more efficient.

So states and municipalities with federally-funded colleges now have a financial incentive to legalize all protests, right?

Key paragraph, for anyone wondering which specific drugs are implicated:

The study also points to differences between different drugs. The SSRI [selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor] escitalopram was associated with the fastest cognitive decline, followed by the SSRIs citalopram and sertraline. Mirtazapine, which has a different mechanism of action, had less negative cognitive impact than escitalopram.

Maybe not—current AI seems more focused on mimicking and distilling human behavior than on reasoning out optimal behavior on its own.

Quantum circuits aren’t general-purpose computers—they’re added to conventional computers to allow them to perform a small handful of algorithms more efficiently. I don’t believe any of those algorithms would benefit the basic features of an operating system enough that it would make sense to modify an OS to require the use of one.

(Although I could totally see Microsoft doing something like only licensing their circuit’s drivers to run on Windows.)

I believe so—see Wake-on-LAN.

I’m not disputing the value of simulations (although I think you’re overstating it a bit—by your criteria all of 20th-century science that didn’t include new lab results should be dismissed as “armchair philosophy”). But I think simulations should focus on testing those implications of a theory that aren’t predictable without a simulation—on getting answers you don’t already know. Like in this case, say: what happens when you introduce multiple traits and a polygenetic genotype-phenotype map? Such a simulation would confirm the same things this one does while also potentially advancing the theory in new ways.

States are explicitly prohibited by the Constitution from “enter[ing] into any treaty, alliance, or confederation” with foreign states, but there are plenty of cases of state and local governments joining economic partnerships and initiatives.

I completely agree with their conclusion, but their simulations seem a bit superfluous—I can hardly imagine them having a different outcome.

Is it no longer acceptable to pose simple thought experiments without acting them out in silico?

Career officials at the CIA have been quietly discussing that risk and how to mitigate it in the recent weeks, current and former intelligence officials previously told CNN. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard earlier this week suggested that those discussions represented a “threat” made by disloyal government employees — rather than a clinical warning of the potential risks posed by President Donald Trump’s aggressive cost-cutting strategy — and that those involved should be penalized.

She wants to penalize people for trying to mitigate the risks caused by needlessly penalizing people?

If the dark ages were so called due to the shortage of sources, ours will be called the glare-blind age in contrast.

Careful, Menocchio.

The gist.

...gist processes form representations of an event's semantic features rather than its surface details, the latter being a property of verbatim processes.

I read that part and also this one:

[Angela Jackson] said she wanted to see the company lead by making a more robust business case for the programmes. "They've made the right moves. The one step they could go further... is to really say, 'Yes it's our values, we believe it's the right thing to do, but it's also an economic imperative."

Cook’s statement about “needing to make some changes to comply”, while not indicating any immediate changes, is setting the stage for future compromise, not a principled defense of its policies.

While [Trump-supporting] CEO Andy Yen's recent public statements have raised my hackles more than a little, Proton remains structurally committed to privacy, encryption, and user control, ensuring its ecosystem stays independent of political shifts.

That’s a pretty weak definition of “Trump-proof”.

We thank our shareholders for standing firm on this issue while we preemptively capitulate.

I wonder how this is affecting life insurance rates for insurance CEOs.

Found the vampire.

Are the people who would have bought Teslas now buying other EVs, or passing on buying a new car altogether?