HumanPenguin @ HumanPenguin @feddit.uk

Posts

9

Comments

956

Joined

2 yr. ago

Honest question.

Yep any target based system leads to people manipulating them to pass. It is just a common human response to forced competition.

But calling wait lists pointless is also pointless. Without some better way to ensure patients are getting the service they need as effectively as possible.

So other then spending lots more money. (I agree thats needed but in itself dose not provide metrics of a service)

What would you propose as a method for measuring NHS effectivness.

Yep. And given some expectations. That is good news.

Honestly the government has not implemented anything that will as of yet effect growth. These things take time.

But some interpretations of the recent budget caused our nations interest rates to go up. Meaning any drop in gdp would lead to deficiency in payments. IE a need to reduce spending or raise income to prevent even higher rates.

Evidence that the economy is stable. Should mean the cost of UK borrowing stops increasing for a while. Allowing the government plans to continue.

Blender supports cuda for much of its gpu work. It will work with amd. And there are projects allowing gpu rendering via amd. But they are (and have been for a while) a long way behind the cuda stuff.

For major rendering projects nvidia is still the fastest set up to use.

AMD. Unless you need blender.

Unless

Exactly.

they want to shoot down nuclear missiles using satellites.

Very Reagan era star wars project of them.

Lol just ordered an air fryer / dehumidifier for this exact reason. Thanks for confirming it works.

As the one I ordered can run at <80c the recommended dehumidifier temp for asa. That is exactly what i plan to try it on.

The art of the deal.

Fuck the party thats not you.

And hiring a prick with 0 military or tactical experience definatly helps not winning.

Artificial merely implies manmade, as opposed to naturally developed IMO.

Yeah but we do not use it for that anywhere else. Everywhere else we use artificial it is referring to something that dose not contain the original product. And implies something lesser.

When talking about intelligence we use artificial in a unique way to describe something digital or created. And honestly. You better hope emotion is never a part of that creation.

As for you definition of its how humans think. Sorry but you do not know that. It is the very hypothesis I was claiming you need to find a way to test.

As I say we have lots of ideas / hypotheses on human and animal thought. Bot absolutely nothing that would move such into the relms of a theory. As of yet. We are not even sure how to test most of those hypothesis. All we do is measure neurons electrical and chemical transfer. We are a very very long way from tieing that to any process of original thought or generation of ideas.

As I say. Id love it if you were proven correct. But ATM we don't even know how to proove you or anyone else wrong on this subject.

Have fun.

The issue is your interpretation is at best an hypothsis. Not a fact. And the only way to prove your hypothsis is to simulate the thought you wish to create.

Others have not managed it yet. But you may be the first. Personally i am not sold on the idea. Bur would love to see you prove me wrong.

That is after all the point of science.

But linguistics wise.

How is that intelegence artificial?

I think you underestimate the hate.

For the organisations that want to deny the ideals suggested. Using software under such a licence would lose them support. So when developers select such a licence. The software itself gets recognised as such. Meaning any shitty organisation using it gets labeled unacceptable to their very user base.

So requiring the acceptance of these facts would have the same effect as anything else.

Cheers ill look into it.

I think such a licence would need very careful wording. Wording that concentrates on the entity or organisation using rather then jurisdiction.

GPL claims free as in speech not beer. Whereas this would be removing that very concept. By suggesting use for some ideas is not allowed.

I can def see the advantage. Especially for people developing social software. But trying to form a licence like that. While not running fowl of existing GPL restrictions. Would take some seriose legal understanding. As making gpled current libraries incompatible. Could totally remove existing work to expand upon. Removing most developers desire to place the effort needed for the new software.

Would be interesting to watch the project form though. Unfortunately it would be very much like watching a dangerous stunt. Facinating as much for the risk of failure as that of hoping for success.

Ssh x11 forwarding has been a popular system for decades. (Id love to know if wayland options exist yet)

But as other have suggested you need x11 on both systems. It is very inbuilt into the way x11 was originally designed. (From back when we had huge shared servers and dumbish xterm workstations. This means it was designed to do much of the work on the server end with the display being the lower cost less able system.

It will work on a pie. But not with the lite os system as designed.

However, stopping oil immediately before alternatives are in place would be a humanitarian disaster

I agree. But many don't. Its def up for debate.

But that is in no way justification for new dilling. All drilling new fields dose is give excuses to delay those alternatives. We are not really waiting for new tech to solve this problem. The tech we have today is able to do it. What we need it the fiscal and societal motivation to move away from oil. More oil will just motivate those currently making money from it to slow down that investment more.

We need to invest in major inferstructure uprated to our electrical grid. Copy ideas like Norway new overhead power for trucking. (Think electric trams but using roads and semi trucks. Then using battery for last mile transport etc. While its only a trial being built atm. It is the type of thinking we need. And better electrical grids are the first steps.

Unfortunately giving current oil interests longer is not in anyway the solution. As a society we need to accept the use is going to stop. So pull our freaking socks up and get on with it. We don't need to wait for new tech. We need to implement the best of the current tech and stop finding excuses.

Yeah that was sorta my point. Modern/ current technology at best mimics some functionality of intelligence. Hence my claim it is artificial. It really is no more then 1980s expert systems with much greater data speeds and sets. And more flexible algorithms. But an evolution not a revolution.

He ce why I'd say artificial intelligence applies to current technology. Because it is not real.

If we ever develop anything that is intelligence as many fear it. Then by its very definition AI is no longer a valid term for it. Hence why O think we should stop using that term when talking about weather such things are safe or not. First It gives the impression to the less informed that we are anywhere close to such tech. Creating invalid fears of current tech. When lets face it their are plenty of genuine arguments about the massive use of data.

But more importantly if ever anything (sci-filike as it may be) that is trully able to learn and think for itself is developed (if that would even be the correct term as we really are that ill-informed on how atm) . Then artificial would be a miss definition.

Nameing them and criticism is def not a first amendment violation.

Just at the least very irresponsible. If we assume he knows the violent nature of some of his followers. (June 6th of course he knows) by definition terrorism even if legally not. As the choice is likely done as a threat to control their political expressions.

But no the first amendment in no way provides protection for you based on your speech. Just a probation on government specifically passing laws to prevent it.

If we never drill for it. Or allow anyone else. Studies will run out eventually.

It is in no way a solution. But the simple fact is adding new wells extends the time corperations and governments can delay implementing alternatives. Increasing the total amount of harm done to the enviroment.

It is not a zero sum game. Providing our own dose not mean the world burns the same amount t it means we burn for longer with less urgency to alternative options and inferstructure.

I mean honestly I am 54 years old. I learned about climate change in school in 1982. It was known proven science back that far. Esso/Exxon was the company that discovered and prooved it was man made back in the early 70s. They then decided to invest billions in climate change denial. Internally selling ideas like the one you are sharing.

These ideas exist for one reason. To allow oil companies to extract every fucking penny they can out of oil. Before we stop them. Its fucking disgusting that they have not been jailed.

If they were. (As unlikely as that seems)

Actually stating so would be the best way to prevent having to do so. That is what bothers me about media asking world leaders this. All they are doing is giving a war criminal a list of safe and unsafe nations to visit. Surely any nation that was seriose about wanting to arrest him. Would remain silent about it.