bweitzman

So if language comes from the structure of the brain, what would stop us from simulating that structure to give a machine mastery of language? And specifically what would imply that a machine which had some of that structure would need to learn by interaction as the top level comment suggests?

While they may be common, they're not actually built into the language. They're just regular functions.

From what I've heard about tone clusters, they sort of came about as continuations of the natural progression of more and more intervals to sound pleasant (or at least acceptable) as time has gone by. Tone clusters are like predictions of what will sound acceptable in the future.

The more we use certain intervals, the more we like hearing them. I suppose you can view that through two lenses: the intervals sound less dissonant, or our cutoff where we say that a dissonant interval is unacceptable has changed. Though tbh those seem like the same to me.

There are different ways to assign pitches to notes. What is commonly used in modern western music is called equal temperament, but there are other systems, like just intonation, for example.

Yeah I think those patterns are completely irrelevant when talking about the characteristics of notes and combinations of them.

Notes do not have timbre, they are just named pitches (which themselves are just frequencies).

I think you could make the argument that more common place actually means less dissonant.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tone_cluster

It's the last paragraph of the article.

Like the article (thankfully) mentions, the photographs really do have nothing to with the notes themselves. Intervals and chords have characters, individual notes do not.

The interests of the lawmakers are more aligned with corporations with deep pockets than with the general population (at least regarding copyright laws).

Fixing this issue via the legislative process would therefor require realigning lawmakers with their constituents, which could be done possibly by enacting laws which prevent contributions from corporations (which is itself something that lawmakers may disagree with their constituents about) or by a grassroots campaign to basically replace the entire legislative branch with non corrupt law makers.

Both of these paths are slow and difficult, if possible at all. Meanwhile, there is an argument that the law is unconstitutional which means that it could be repealed immediately. We are still completely within the realm of being a citizen. This is the whole point of the checks and balances system.

What could possibly be more important than happiness?

You are not trying to prove the thing, just trying to encode it, The assumption is that the proof already exists.

If walking is not an entity then how is consciousness an entity? Further, the mass, charge, etc that we define an electron by are shorthands for describing the way it behaves which is all we can glean based on observation. You cannot observe the property of mass directly

There's nothing wrong with paywalls and ads. It's annoying when sites with paywalls are posted to public forums since any number of people are not going to be able to join the discussion, but this isn't the site's fault. I think sometimes people forget that they pay for certain websites when they submit. Plus it turns the forum into an advertisement which is not really the intended use.

Likewise, ads are fine in theory but the implementation is absolutely horrible.

It's a recruiting scheme.

Yeah I'm not commenting on the results. The sample size was way too small to be a reasonable study and yeah, weeks is not enough to talk about long term results. But the basic principle of the experiment is sound I think.

No, the study said that the subjects (who were either dependent on marijuana or non users) were given the amphetamine to elicit a dopamine response. The users did not smoke for a week prior to the experiment, so you would expect that if there were no dopamine deficits than they would have similar response to the amphetamine. I'm no brain scientist but it seems like a reasonable experiment.

I don't see why we should be relying on the emotional responses of people rather than on cold hard policy. I mean, to be fair, we already have the policy, but I think we should address why it's failing to be implemented. I'd guess that it's only a small part that due to an underestimate of the amount of harm various police tactics cause targets.

This particular post clearly points out that that this is common and that there is a pattern, which IMO points to management rather than officers being the root cause.

An officer should be thinking, "Wow I'm going to lose my job or face criminal charges if I do this search", not "Hmm I don't think this person is going to enjoy this search very much". And it's pretty obvious to me from the terrible epidemic of police brutality that this attitude is not common, nor encouraged.

I think that's unnecessary. Obviously police officers shouldn't have to be shot before they are allowed to shoot people, so where is the cutoff?

No I didn't say that, and I don't believe that.

Premiums going up because of drug users is not unilateral, you have the drug users and the insurance companies both taking actions.

Why wouldn't the government just get a warrant to have you decrypt whatever communication they'd like to see (if you're being investigated) and if you don't you are held in contempt of court?

Of course if all communication is encrypted it would be harder for a government to get a warrant but I think that's probably more in line with the 4th amendment.

Yeah but hypocrisy doesn't take away from the point the author is making. Something can be true and also be ad hominem.

Knowing any single piece of information is not a big deal, but stringing them together is basically stalking which is illegal.

Sounds like somebody figured out the single responsibility principle

If you have an opportunity to increase profitability and you don't take it you _are_ losing money, at least so long as the opportunity is sustainable.

Rational?

It's not a job I'd want to do but it makes sense.

I remember reading something a few years ago that criticized the use of the term psychopath because it wasn't defined in a rigid way and the definition basically tracked the general populations general fears. And because we as a society are afraid of corporations now, CEO's become the target, and possibly the baseline, for the definition of psychopath.

I'm sure that many CEOs share a certain personality type, but to claim that most CEOs have a serious mental disorder seems ridiculous to me.

You can upload FLAC to google music. Not sure if it stores in that format though, and I think streaming is max 320

in the google music app, not play, go to the hamburger menu -> settings. Should be at the top under the account section, you may need to hit the refresh button under the same the section.