jjaredsimpson

It does actually. Article and references both state quantum theory and relativity are the foundation in deriving the limit.

I think having the opinion that AGI is possible is quite reasonable given the existence of humans. I happen to believe its' advent is inevitable. I don't see how humans won't come to invent an AGI at some point in the future. Consciousness is a physical information process taking place in a physical universe. Any other attempt at explanation is woo woo.

I like to think that short story was inspired by the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe

>there is a little man inside your pc... and his thing is bigger than yours. Your wife knows this.

I'm supposed to believe this technology is dangerous. But the advocates are children.

Stickers are compression. They very quickly express some message in a playful way.

Same argument applies to humans

If you own land, you would owe land value tax, regardless of what you have done to the land. If you just hold the land and do nothing you still owe tax. No one forces you to sell the land.

This:

>When there's a more profitable use for your land than you are current exploiting, you must give the land up

is not accurate.

> Land should be collectively owned by the people living on it and producing from it.

Why should this be the case?

a > b is the same as b < a and I would argue a > b is clearer in this instance by noting the symmetry of the following line:

    if ( a[smallestSoFar] > a[nextToCheck] ) {
      smallestSoFar = nextToCheck ;
    }

When a > b then a = b

The order of the variables doesn't change.

The value is called nextToCheck because the article is specifically talking about loop invariants. The value of nextToCheck only makes sense when loop invariant is established prior to the loop and after work has been done in the loop to reestablish the loop invariant.

In both of those cases the value in nextToCheck is clearly meant to denote the half open interval [0, nextToCheck) which contains the smallestSoFar.

currentComparisonIndex is not the correct name for the loop variable because that name is only accurate after checking the termination condition and prior to incrementing. This is not what the loop invariant states the purpose of nextToCheck is. Therefore you would not have established a proper loop invariant prior to entering your loop. nextToCheck might more fully be called 'nextToCheckAfterTerminationCheck'

Of course this is all meta above the level of the language is self. You could call the variable 'foo' and of course the code would still function.

Yeah some people still act under the illusion that online speech should have no consequences in the physical world.

Land is a scarce resource. Downtown properties in urban cities, beachfront properties, lake front properties.

Access to a hot new chef's 5 star restaurant on a Friday night.

Energy consumption can not increase without bound. Every human on the planet can not have a 10GW datacenter to simulate their own perfect Matrix where they are King of all creation. The thermodynamics of waste heat certainly puts limits on potential energy utilization for 15 billion humans.

Your inability to conceive of limitations that are certainly present, is not an indication that those limitations do not exist.

Certain physical goods will always be scarce and there is a limit to energy utilization. I agree that subsistence work for survival is on the way out but I'm unconvinced humans will stop competing for status and resources because of abundance.

procrastination is delay in doing things you don't particularly want to do but still understand are obligations. Delaying doing homework/office work/yard work.

idea debt is: the struggle with creative sunk costs. Thinking in circles about something you are interested in while accomplishing no really progress in making your idea a tangible thing.

Why is this relevant?

That's not the same thing at all.

Neurons do not possess a mind, yet a collection does.

Humans do possess minds, and a collection of them does not.

You can't use the first statement to support the opposite of the second statement because the premise is dissimilar.

Humanity isn't an actor with a will. It doesn't "do" anything.

I was referencing the superiority of AI minds to biological minds. Humanity not a thing which possesses a mind.

To say nothing of the inherent advantages of immortality and self modification.

>This whole blog post has shades of anti-intellectualism that creeps me out a bit - that assume that the intelligentsia must be malicious

I don't agree. I think the point of the article is about the nature of the exchange.

>in this supposed bargain, what we give the professionals is concrete and clearly valuable, while what they give us (over what we’d get without the deal) is vague and very hard for us to check.

and

>There is actually no bargain, there is just the rest of us submitting to professionals’ prestige. Cheaper yet outcome-effective substitutes to expensive professionals have long been physically available, and yet we have mostly not chosen those substitutes due to our eagerness to affiliate with prestigious professionals.

I don't see an argument to change regulatory structures in the article.

You go to school for years and become an expert in a field. Understanding isn't out of the reach of any graduate student in the relevant field I would assume.

> it doesn't make sense to me how something could be described as infinite (density) and finite (time) at the same time.

The sequence A_n = 2-n = 1, 1/2, 1/4, ..., has infinitely many terms, yet a finite sum 2.

Different properties of a thing are different after all.

Like Hilbert.

Most internet content is garbage designed to maximize ad revenue. If it went away nothing of value is lost.

Magazines also are affordable because of ads. Most magazines are pure trash I would never read.

    newtype HeadList a = HeadList { getHeadList :: [a] }

    instance Monad HeadList where 
         return a = HeadList [a]
         m >>= f = HeadList $ fmap (head . getHeadList . f) (getHeadList m) 

This is a list instance that only keeps the head of function result, so it's basically just a map.

But you could imagine putting any function that returns one result. min max avg normalize, etc

kolmogorov complexity and mutual information are the things that explain the difference.

The super mario rom is a very compact description of the super mario game, in the context of its environment.

The jpeg environment isn't very well designed as an environment to display a single frame from a flat colored video game.

Why

I don't like the handwritten messy slides.

I don't see how that analogy works at all. Higher dimensions have completely different physics than lower dimensions. Whereas pointers are just an interpretation of an already existing data type.

I really enjoyed HFR it only distracted me for the first few minutes.

The actions scenes were way clearer.

I saw the first 2 hobbits on TV and the 3rd in theaters. And I definitely preferred HFR.

This is a distinction without difference. You could've also said, "Startups have fewer employees" for instance.

How does the urge to grow separate a startup from a business in the desire to obtain low cost debt?

Electromagnetism is a the effect of a physical field that permeates all of space. Fields are real things, not just useful calculators.

Some of Max Tegmark's writing as well as Lawrence Krauss' have describe gravity as the "cost" or the thing that is balanced by the expansion of space.

The expansion of space having been driven by another as yet undescribed field.

All things are physical. Consciousness is a side effect of information processing. Seems like we just have fundamentally different assumptions about what can be a valid belief.

I don't just disagree with you. I think your belief about consciousness isn't even well formed. I don't even think there could exist evidence to support a belief like "consciousness creates matter".

Yes flat earth is more like a first approximation to a better theory. Materialism isn't like that imo. I believe materialism to be correct.