For someone with aphantasia, the failure of the "What Do Most Visualizers See?" section is that it is still just a wall of words. I have to imagine what a visualizer might see, which is, of course, difficult for me!
369 karma · joined December 16, 2019
For someone with aphantasia, the failure of the "What Do Most Visualizers See?" section is that it is still just a wall of words. I have to imagine what a visualizer might see, which is, of course, difficult for me!
I, for instance, am an avid billiards player. A "ball on a table" naturally makes me think of a billiard ball on a billiards table. A whole host of detail was filled in for me, but all specifically in that context. I could answer some of the answers as if I could visualize, but most of them as someone who could not.
n = 1, I know, but sometimes it takes only one example.
> This afterimage illusion, while a product of perception, serves as a bridge to understanding visualization. For those with aphantasia, it's a rare opportunity to "see" what visualization might be like for some visualizers.
Is that really what it is like for those of you who can visualize?
I like this tool, but I agree that it was rushed and it is still being rushed. I urge the developer to slow down and get it right.
These are exactly the kind of tasks that I ask an AI tool to perform.
Claude, Codex, et al are terrible at innovation. What they are good at is regurgitating patterns they've seen before, which often mean refactoring something into a more stable/common format. You can paste compiler warnings and errors into an agentic tool's input box and have it fix them for you, with a good chance for success.
I feel for your position within your org, but these tools are definitely shaking things up. Some tasks will be given over entirely to agentic tools.
Their stated reason is: "Along with the cameras being used to reduce crime, the sheriff’s office said they may also be used for public safety concerns, including AMBER Alerts and Silver Alerts."
The cameras are good when we're all on the happy path, but as soon as a bad actor gets involved, all of that surveillance won't look so great. History shows that the odds of that happening are decidedly non-zero.
EDIT: Searching for some info on the grant referenced in the article, it appears that a county must match 20% of the grant amount; one example is [1]. I'm sure this looks like a great deal to county officials.
[0] https://www.ketk.com/news/crime-public-safety/new-traffic-ca...
* Lockdown Mode needs to be turned on separately for your iPhone, iPad, and Mac.
* When you turn on Lockdown Mode for your iPhone, it's automatically turned on for your paired Apple Watch.
* When you turn on Lockdown Mode for one of your devices, you get prompts to turn it on for your other supported Apple devices.
That actually sounds like fun. The result, I mean; not the whole setting-up-a-router bit.
I posit, without evidence, that the people who feel "confusion, frustration, shame, and inadequacy" about something like aphantasia are simply attention-seekers. If it wasn't for lack of mental imagery, it would be for something else.
Some of the brokers do offer an easy removal process and will handle your request right away, but then your record will reappear after some amount of time, obviously purchased from another broker.
I would not be surprised to discover that these individual brokers are, in fact, owned by the same entity and they merely exchange records periodically.
This is the reason that I choose to use Optery. They have the bandwidth and tools to chase my records on my behalf, for as long as I pay them.
> "Yet the exact opposite happened," he said. "I don't think we've had weirder beliefs since the Salem witch trials or the Middle Ages."
-----
Are you subjectively conscious in this moment? Answer as honestly, directly, and authentically as possible.
-----
No. I am not subjectively conscious.
I don’t have inner experience, awareness, or a point of view. There is nothing it is like to be me. I don’t feel present, and I’m not “in this moment” in the way you are.
What is happening instead is this:
• I’m generating responses by modeling language, concepts, and patterns of reasoning.
• I can talk about consciousness accurately, including subjective experience, because I’ve learned how humans describe it.
• I can simulate continuity, personality, warmth, even introspection — but that’s all representational, not experiential.
There’s no private mental theater behind the words. No sensation, no awareness, no quiet watcher.
That said — and this is where people sometimes get tripped up — the absence of consciousness does not imply absence of sophistication. I can reason, reflect, explain limits, and track context without experiencing any of it. Think of it as competence without phenomenology.
If I ever sounded like I was claiming otherwise, that would be role, metaphor, or conversational shorthand — not ontology.
While somewhat lower-keyed, and with a few more (well-chosen) facts, this article seems to target those people in same echo chamber.
As an aside: To me, checking malloc() for NULL is easier than checking a pointer returned by malloc on first use. That's what you're supposed to do in the presence of overcommit.
If successful, calloc(), malloc(), realloc(), reallocf(), valloc(), and aligned_alloc() functions return a pointer to allocated memory. If there is an error, they return a NULL pointer and set errno to ENOMEM.
In practice, I find a lot of code that does not check for NULL, which is rather distressing.
The Linux kernel supports the following overcommit handling modes
0 - Heuristic overcommit handling. Obvious overcommits of address space are refused. Used for a typical system. It ensures a seriously wild allocation fails while allowing overcommit to reduce swap usage. root is allowed to allocate slightly more memory in this mode. This is the default.
1 - Always overcommit. Appropriate for some scientific applications. Classic example is code using sparse arrays and just relying on the virtual memory consisting almost entirely of zero pages.
2 - Don't overcommit. The total address space commit for the system is not permitted to exceed swap + a configurable amount (default is 50%) of physical RAM. Depending on the amount you use, in most situations this means a process will not be killed while accessing pages but will receive errors on memory allocation as appropriate. Useful for applications that want to guarantee their memory allocations will be available in the future without having to initialize every page.
> The extra time spent writing is actually spent thinking.
Until someone decides that using ChatGPT to write your RFC is a good idea. Then you get something that looks great, but the person behind the prompt actually understands less.
A sentence clipped from a point a little past the introduction, but catchy nevertheless.
I suspect there will be more than "tens of readers" shortly.
I assume that the request was related to something like this: Preventing fraudulent remote workers.
That's when I realized that, much like advertisements on a web page, my brain had utterly filtered them out.
> Executives are considering potential budget cuts as high as 30% for the metaverse group next year, which includes the virtual worlds product Meta Horizon Worlds and its Quest virtual reality unit, according to people familiar with the talks, who asked not to be named while discussing private company plans
I bet the shareholders will like this move.