rule
we might not know exactly how our brain produces consciousness, but because the components we can see must be involved, it isn’t a discreet phenomenon
This statement begins with the assumption that the brain produces consciousness, then says that because the thing that produces consciousness has components, that it can't be fundamental. This is a really really good example of circular logic.
I find emergence to be the least reasonable of the 3 main hypotheses I consider, but I still accept that it's possible since I can't disprove it. However, it is illogical to conclude your hypothesis must be true at this stage.
Your comparison proves nothing. It is no different than insisting a radio must be creating the signal it's picking up, because if you poured alcohol or liquid gabapentin all over it, it will no longer be able to play music. I'm sure you realize that if your radio breaks, that doesn't mean the radio signal has disappeared. It is possible our brains are simply interfacing with consciousness rather than inexplicably fabricating it from more than the sum of its parts.
Based on everything science has taught me, it seems far more likely to me that consciousness is not magically created by my brain, but rather one of two things are happening:
- My brain is able to interface with a conscious field
- Consciousness is a force inherent within the universe, and our brains are able to make use of the force
Why would you assume it's an emergent property and thus should be dismissed as not being a force of nature? I'm making fewer assumptions than you are by wanting to list it alongside the other forces until we can determine if it is emergent or not, and the implications of such emergence. It's kind of a big deal that we can sit here and ponder the forces of nature with some degree of control over our little sack of atoms.
It's safe to say that this list is going to change over time and represents a current snapshot of humanity's limited understanding. Under the current snapshot of human understanding, leaving it off of the list seems to me to indicate an ironic bias on the behalf of researchers who must use the very force in question to do anything. By necessity, it is the overarching phenomenon surrounding all other forces since the only place we can definitively know these forces even exist is within our own mind. To say anything more is to make assumptions.
While I agree that a certain level of assumptions are necessary if we're going to get anywhere, I'm also acutely aware that they're still assumptions and that assumptions are not scientific. If we're going to be scientific about this, we need to make as few assumptions as possible.
Not the one with the complaint, but I can see their point. Decapitations during birth happen around the world several times a year, with only some of those cases ever going to the news. When they do hit the news, they spread quickly because of the shock factor. Yet the general public may come away from this not realizing it's is far from the first time and won't be the last.
I'd say this would make a great world news article if some of the prior cases from across the world were also mentioned, and the bigger issue of women being dismissed by their doctors was prominently referenced with supporting studies.
Yeah, I took a look at the code they used in the article that might help someone generate functional attacks. A rando experimenting without permission would likely get banned from the service.
Forces of Nature
- electromagnetism
- strong nuclear force
- weak nuclear force
- gravity
5?. whatever the hell might be acting on the muons in this article
Quick, everyone ignore 0 because it's "too hard", even though it's the only reason we can study 1-5: consciousness
I just tried this on ChatGPT, it doesn't work.
I hadn't heard this so I did a search to see what you were talking about. One of the first things that comes up is a quote from this guy whining that he doesn't trust Wikipedia anymore because they don't allow Daily Mail or Fox News as sources of reliable information. You know, the gossip rag Daily Mail that posts anything "sources say" for clicks, and the same Fox News that was found to be flat out lying to its viewers on a number of sociopolitical issues. What a putz.
It's so ironic because we even have an inferno planet next door with a runaway greenhouse effect that everyone can use as an example. With an average surface temperature of 464 degrees, Venus got through to me as a small child. But knowing the type of ignorant person we're talking about, Venus would just be held as further "proof" that Earth's climate change isn't caused by human activity.
I agree there were so many screw-ups in the response, especially in the early days. China insisting upon secrecy until it spread across the globe, the WHO's confusing statements on the efficacy of masks in order to preserve supplies for the front lines, the ridiculous pro-masker vs anti-masker mentality, the Trump fiasco where he suggested doctors use lemon fresh Lysol or whatever the hell he was on about to disinfect people's lungs as if he has a goddamed clue, the alt-right losing their minds over a dangerous vaccine with Bill Gates computer chips in it, etc.
But remember CFCs and the hole in the ozone layer? Scientists were like "Hey, guys. There's a hole here. We need to stop using this crap or we dead." And everyone banded together and stopped using CFCs, and the hole in the ozone layer closed happily ever after. Sometimes we can actually do it right. I don't know, maybe it'll take a crisis like losing Florida to the ocean for Americans to collectively give a shit again and start doing things right. Or maybe we'll all die before we get a chance to see that happen.
I did. He assured me in more professional terms that they don't give a shit. I do a lot of business with them and have been a client in good standing since I became an adult. They apparently have nothing set up to retain customers who leave over this, which would indicate that hasn't been an issue for them. Or they might be banking on me not following through, but that just means they don't know me very well. When it comes time for me to make those changes to my policy, I'm gone.
Privacy has been beaten to a bloody pulp, but the fight doesn't need to be called yet. Don't give up, keep telling everyone you can. I know things are looking low right now, but every person you reach matters.
In the case of Zoom, an approach that could actually work is having every step of the solution already completed if you've got an employer trying to push Zoom on employees. Make sure you can clearly state here's the problem, here's why it's dangerous for the company, here's a great alternative, here's why it's safest for the company, and here's how you install it. Reach out to the IT dept if you're not the IT dept to get them on board. If the advice is coming from multiple employees, that will help your case.
Imagine getting caught and having your claim denied or being sued for insurance fraud. I'm happy to use ublock origin, but what you're describing is playing with fire. We need to make sure it never gets to this point in the first place by making it illegal for insurance companies to do this.
Something needs to happen to clue in the average person about why this is such a problem. I don't know what that something is though. Continued breaches of privacy? The government and police continuing to make obvious use of the data they can easily buy from any of these companies? What is it going to take for people to care and for laws to be made to prevent more of this going forward?
I was talking to my insurance company the other day and they warned me that if I make any changes to my policy they'll drastically jack up my rate because of the changes in the economy. But I can bring it down a bit if I install their tracking software on my phone that can interface with my vehicle and send all of my driving data to them. It would tell them everywhere I ever go whenever I drive, my exact speed at any moment, braking habits, etc. Does anyone ever say yes to this? Do people realize that they could sift through everything you've ever done effortlessly with AI to find that one time in your life you came to a rolling stop at a deserted stop sign and claim you're a dangerous driver who doesn't follow the rules of the road in order to deny your claim?
Is there a chance in hell that one day this won't be a requirement just to have vehicle insurance? Why isn't everyone up in arms about their data being harvested and sold to the highest bidder? Why are there not laws being made against this kind of undemocratic, authoritarian control over people? I am so disappointed in my fellow man, both the ones guilty of the harvesting and everyone who couldn't be bothered to complain and put a stop to this.
Foot dick has a glossy NPC gaze, but the girl on the front left looks fun.
They probably know better than to eat their own product.
Don't give France any ideas.
this study was funded by the National Institutes of Health and the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute under grant numbers R21 HL135300 and R01 HL150053, as well as by contracts from the NIH/NHLBI funding the four field centers.
It says right on the study how it was funded, that guy was being sarcastic and rude which is why he was downvoted. If there is a bias in this study, it's not immediately apparent from the funding.
I mostly agree with your point, just substitute "genetics" for the actual array of reasons why we have an obesity epidemic. Environment, upbringing, emotional state, level of education, financial resources, access to healthy food, sedentary lifestyle, disordered eating habits, trauma, medications, hormonal imbalances, physical and mental health, etc.
It's common sense that people trying to lose weight are more likely to reach for non-caloric products, and with other studies showing that most people who lose weight will gain it back within 5-10 years, it's makes this study's results obvious and proves nothing new unfortunately. Sweeteners very well could be an independent cause of weight gain, but until they account for all of the confounding factors that influence why people gain and lose weight, they won't be able to determine its true role in the matter.
Was the check engine light virtue signalling again?