akyu

The block producer chooses transaction ordering. They control who gets sandwiched. Running your own node won't change anything.

If you can borrow token A at X% interest, but there is an opportunity to use that borrowed token and earn Y% interest, if Y is greater than X, you can make profit. This is a super simplified explanation but that's the gist of it. Basically defi is a gigantic game of rehypothecation.

People like Wilson are a rare breed. He stuck to his guns despite the huge backlash around Sociobiology. From my vantage point, it seems everyone else is coming around to eventually admitting he was basically right all along, begrudgingly of course.

I'm highly confident they are paying close attention to these companies.

>(8) If possible, join or help organize a group for presenting employee problems to the management. See that the procedures adopted are as inconvenient as possible for the management, involving the presence of a large number of employees at each presentation, entailing more than one meeting for each grievance, bringing up problems which are largely imaginary, and so on.

This is from the extended version. Feels really strangely relevant these days...

Do we understand large language models?

The American Brahmin class asserts its dominance.

Considering that the next figure is a computer simulation from the same citation, yes I believe they have heard of such an amazing tool.

I chalk up the physical robots to a bit of a PR stunt. Cool little robots is quite a bit more endearing than arrows on a computer screen. But that said, implementing such a system in physical robots could also be a kind of sanity check to ensure you aren't cheating the simulation by some kind of fault in your simulation. It's quite easy to share information between agents that you don't want being shared without realizing it. Something as simple as being a little careless with global variables could spoil the whole thing.

I wouldn't get so worked up about it.

>A universal Turing machine that "contains all Turing machines" already exists

You are misquoting the paper here

Quoting the abstract:

>Assuming that a superintelligence will contain a program that includes all the programs that can be executed by a universal Turing machine on input potentially as complex as the state of the world...

Note the difference between "programs" and "Turing Machines".

Make the best songs you can make with the skill level you have now. Too easy or too hard is irrelevant really. Is the song good? And maybe more importantly, are you having fun? When you ask a musician about what is the best song they ever wrote, it is fairly common for them to say that their best song was the easiest to write.

>We respect your privacy. We will not share your data with anyone for marketing purposes.

Yet the homepage has Google analytics and Squarespace cross site trackers. Not a great first impression.

Yes. The antitrust suit seems to be a tool for legal discovery. And its a nice way to apply pressure from all sides to make Zuck feel the burn. This is about the government getting its hands into moderation and content control on Facebook. I'm not sure how I feel about that. Not saying it's good or bad, but that's what this is.

They squirm and recoil when you reveal the true plan. Careful.

Is that not what 'actively resist' means?

No.

They paid him to direct an ad and he directed an ad. You are falling for the marketing my friend.

The simplest strategy for "simple, emotional, and irrational critters" to adopt is to conspire together. You are just proving the point.

They do detect them.

You're assuming that they would get an answer if they asked those questions. I highly doubt that.

>microwaving the blood to blasting it with UV or just shining some rainbow coloured lights on it.

Or you could just say, "blast it with electromagnetic waves".

>The scientific consensus today is what is stated in the linked wikipedia article.

Simply saying this doesn't make it true. This is not true and that Wikipedia article is outdated.

I'm merely a casual observer of neuroscience, but I feel like I already knew this. This isn't a huge leap if you accept that Spike-timing-dependent plasticity is happening.

I can only speculate, but I'd imagine that anyone working in areas that touch on the technology that could lead to these kinds of capabilities get scooped up quietly, and no one else really knows. From the outside it would look like the research was a dead end. This kind of thing has happened before.

With things like these I think it's helpful to look at what is being done, not just what is being said.

  In line with the provisions of Senate Report 116-233, accompanying the IAA for FY 2021, the UAPTF’s long-term goal is to widen the scope of its work to include additional UAP events documented by a broader swath of USG personnel and technical systems in its analysis. As the dataset increases, the UAPTF’s ability to employ data analytics to detect trends will also improve. The initial focus will be to employ artificial intelligence/machine learning algorithms to cluster and recognize similarities and patterns in features of the data points.

Maybe leaning into the aliens angle a little bit is just a way to get funding for this type of thing. "AI surveillance grid" is probably a bit of a hard sell to congress without the added threat implications. That said, if it really is aliens, you'd probably want this same kind of technology all the same, so it doesn't strictly rule anything out. Overall I have to say I'm undecided for the moment, but it certainly is interesting.

If I'm going to speculate though, I think the most likely scenario is there is some really advanced capabilities in the US arsenal, and this is a pre-emptive measure to anticipate adversaries playing catch up. If you have craft that can do what is being asserted, or even just a healthy fraction of those capabilities, it really becomes an information and surveillance game.

I misunderstood your point initially, but yes I agree. In a chess puzzle that was constructed yes it is meta-knowledge. But in the course of a normal game it is not. Importantly this meta-knowledge is not strictly required in either situation.

The distinction in my mind, was that the meta-knowledge here is not about the game of chess, but about the opponent. In the case of the puzzle this is meta-knowledge that the puzzle designer gave you a hint. In the case of Nakamura's game, his meta-knowledge is information about his opponent (the chess engine) and the heuristics it uses.

Chess engines only see the board state (at least to my knowledge), while humans have some kind of information about their opponent, or the history that lead to that board state. Humans have extra information, and sometimes that information is exploitable.

It's not 'meta' knowledge, it's a basic rule of the game.

This could work for casual FPS games, but for competitive FPS gaming like Counter-Strike or Valorant, 20ms is a deal breaker for players who want to perform at a high level.

Pro FPS players consistently choose monitors with the highest refresh rates available.

This informal experiment is quite convincing

Does High FPS make you a better gamer?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OX31kZbAXsA

A 60hz refresh rate corresponds to 16.67 milliseconds frame time, and a 240hz rate corresponds to 4.2 milliseconds.

The issue here is not reaction time, but "feel". Even a moderately skilled player can test this for themselves by switching between refresh rates. Specifically the "feel" is the relationship between moving the mouse and the shift of perspective on the screen. Low refresh rates cause players to over correct their aim as the gaps between frames are larger, and the motion on the screen is less smooth.

The 'universal' aspect of UBI is critical, and many of the attempts to test UBI seem to miss this completely. Call it something else in that case.

I've seen speculation that his method may have been as simple as the ancient Spartan Scytale (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scytale).

You seem to have misunderstood my point.