Comment by gradschoolfail | Hacker News Reader

Comment by gradschoolfail | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

It would appear that our cones align well enough to keep the intersection positive (the conversation semiprocrastinative)

I shant say that artbasel doesnt exist. Shall we align yet more finely to note that the various subtypes of the highest level “markets” serve to distort the market so as to stay (mildly) (dys)functional? A taxonomy of the various markets for lemons/_lemons is in order? Restnt biz is further enough off the manifold that i might not find it that interesting, convince me.

>honeycomb… sheer mass

It might be nice to expand on what senses of these words are alluded here.. “honeycombs“ are nice skeletons that (math)phykers found they cud feed into the vN (inker) blackbox & get out some interpretable Rorschach zombies. (Plausibly) Marketable Schlep to put off the potentially ikigai busting hard thinking ?

[2] coevolution? The mainstream, prodded by NPs, might evolve towards dropping the interpretability/identifiability reqs?

KST?

Judging by the fact that we've managed to converse* for over 1Q now, when the generic HN convo intersects at a point, or at most a thread, I'd say we're pretty well aligned (and maybe on a collision course? — maybe approaching vs receding is how one could distinguish alignment from anti-alignment?)

Restaurants shall have to wait for a lull; for now I just wonder if Shnur pays his hosting service or if they (spb tochka ru) pay him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w2ixHXhSDs

Rorschach zombie? ("I'm not stuck in here defending my thesis to you, you're in here offending my thesis to me!") I'd just meant alu honeycomb and sheer mass as in stiffness techniques for optical tables (tho it appears the resonances mean stiffness/mass matter, not stiffness per se, so granite isn't so good — but maybe granite honeycombs?)

Kip Stephen Thorne. interpretability/identifiability? (if it's the ML term set, you'll have to enlighten me) Recall BAWR: "The man who has fed the chicken every day throughout its life at last wrings its neck instead, showing that more refined views as to the uniformity of nature would have been useful to the chicken."

* insofar as both parties can only read the public part of the other's state, and can write only their own state, it'd be pretty difficult for an online convo to be anything but pareto-optimal, as it only proceeds when both parties are satisfied with its progress? [insert IETF and voluntary collegiality/near-unanimity here]

KST blackhole that he is, might be only approximating his inner state as Killer for better transmission.. recall that he was highly involved in Interstellar, had he been involved in Oppenheimer Bohr might have posed “can you smell the magic” to Oppie instead, dragging Nolan out of the unnecessary composer envy

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42147903

(— thus channelin the other McCarthy “pachyderms may or may not have to shutup”)

wish I hadn't missed Nagle's flagged comment (though I can get the drift); sounds like he (who's been thinking about AI much longer than some flaggers have been alive) went beyond C'Mell and Жестокость?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com