joeyrideout

I became interested in learning Go recently after watching the magnificent AlphaGo movie [1] which is free on YouTube. I highly recommend giving it a watch if you haven't already.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXuK6gekU1Y

On the contrary, I would argue that conscious attention is only focused on one of those subroutines at a time. When the ball is in play you focus in it, and everything from your posture to racket handling fades into the background as a subconscious routine. When you make a handling mistake or want to improve something like posture, your focus shifts to that; you attend to it with your attention, and then you focus on something else.

In either case, with working memory for example, conscious contents are limited to at most a basket of 6-7 chunks. This number is very small compared to the incredible parallelism of the unconscious mind.

This is great! I love The Devil's Plan, I wish I could play all of the games. Some sort of in-person escape room-style experience re-enacting the games would be the best, but I have also thought about making multiplayer video game versions. Wall Go is a perfect candidate! Well done!

The AI seemed easy to me, I know the rules from watching the show and I won by a large margin first try.

I recently listened to this Diary of a CEO podcast episode [1] discussing the potential link between blood glucose from carbohydrate-heavy diets and cancer. It is an alternate metabolic theory of cancer, and the podcast guest claimed that fasting followed by a keto diet was showing early success as an intervention for cancer patients (as an addition, not a replacement, to existing standard of care). I have not seen the data nor do I know the sample size, but the discussion convinced me to rethink my carb intake.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaVC3PAWqLk

"I Taught My Shrimp to Fry Rice" also comes to mind:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/upgdrBO02Gs

RealityKit (iOS & visionOS AR/VR/3D library) makes use of USD. Native apps and games for the Vision Pro will also use USD, alongside their new implementation of Entity Component System (ECS).

One of my favourite board games is called Burn Rate. The premise is a parody of silicon valley during the boom. You compete with the other players for talent (each employee is a card, with varying skill levels).

You could slow down other players by attacking them with “bad idea” cards that would tie up one or more of their engineers for an amount of time. To defend against bad ideas, you need a good manager (one type of employee card).

I could be misremembering some of the details, but the wisdom of the above game mechanic has stuck with me :)

I wish I could, but it is proprietary for now.

I quit my job recently to work on AGI.

I have some unique insights that I wanted to put into practice. The past month has been the most intellectually stimulating, challenging, and rewarding period my life. Some interesting utility has already appeared. I won’t discuss the details but I will say it does not involve statistical learning.

And don’t worry, I’ve read Bostrom :)

> I invent a medicine [...] It costs me 1$

> we sell it with 1$ [sic]

Your profit here is zero, in your own hypothetical scenario. Help me understand why the Math is different.

> competitors will not be allowed to make this for 10 or 20 years

You didn't mention your stance on patents and/or intellectual property. If a medicine is patented, would you be in favor of stealing the patented ideas from the inventor in order to lower costs for life-saving medicines through increased competition? This sounds nice, akin to stealing a loaf of bread when you are hungry, but I can't help but think a society that condones stealing inventions from inventors would breed many inventors. Then we are left with the "nobody made the medicine" problem.

EDIT: And by "inventors", realistically I mean "firms willing to sink hundreds of millions of dollars into R&D".

In scenario #1, there is no financial incentive (read: livable wages for researchers, manufacturers, etc.) to create medicine because your profit is $0, and we have 1000 deaths because nobody makes the medicine.

In theory if the amortized cost of a dose (including R&D salaries, equipment, drug trials, and manufacturing) is truly $1 per dose for such a tiny addressable market, competitors will pop up all over the place and undercut you on price.

From a game theory perspective, a firm choosing option #3 would lose ALL of their market share to another firm choosing option #2, and would have profit of -$1000 because they are unable to sell any of their doses.

The only analogue that comes to mind is in financial fraud detection: moving money slowly or in a predictable pattern (monthly rent payments etc.) triggers no alarms, but large or unexpected transfers raise alarms.

If CBDC issuance coincides with banning physical cash, what makes you think that they won't enforce capital controls on alternative currencies?

European banks recently started toying with the idea of passing down negative interest rates to customer bank deposits, so that banks are less squeezed by reserves yielding negative returns (breaking the typical bank business model).

Just think, if CBDCs pass down the negative interest rates to everyone's cash, inside or outside of banks. That's not a currency I would be happy to hold.

I agree with their assessment. No sensitive data's confidentiality or integrity was impacted, and no availability impact to users.

Wall Street is simply acutely aware that the global economy is highly leveraged and switching off the entire economy is likely to end very badly if a de-leveraging were to take place. Thankfully that did not happen.

EDIT: Of course, some hedge funds that were leveraged something like 100x on risk parity and correlation blew up almost instantly and caused a momentary liquidity crisis, but that was bound to happen :)

> the worst go off to a competitor which then fails to gain mainstream attention (e.g. Voat, Gab, etc).

Or, HN :)

While I don't think the selloff is over, the bull case for American equities (I assume you are talking about U.S. stock market) is still quite strong:

- Emerging markets, Japan, and Euro also being hit by the virus. Where else will capital flow?

- International bond markets selling off as credit risks rise removes bonds as the traditional flight to safety (US Gov Bonds being the notable exception).

- Strong US dollar vs. other world currencies gives international capital extra safety when parked in U.S. stocks.

- Large-cap U.S. equities such as those in the S&P 500 can generally weather short-term liquidity shocks like this, and if anything they will grow by absorbing the market share of failing small businesses.

This article left the same exact taste in my mouth (eyes?)

The author has roughly described the concepts of wage inflation and supply-and-demand (for workers, in one industry, and for consumer goods), and reduced almost everything to "risk premium". Risk is everywhere in the economy, yes. The word "premium" implies additional cost over and above a base cost, which encompasses many more factors.

Edit: To be fair, I'm glad that the author and some readers are excited about learning new concepts. I have many similar blog posts written, though admittedly they stay in my drafts folder if I feel they aren't contributing significant insight :)

From a contrarian investing perspective, the number of non-finance companies branching into finance indicates that we are near the end of this credit cycle. This is large-scale capitulation.

From my cursory understanding, they are not under direct pressure but recent legal fines have implicitly made the risks of remaining operational sky-high. What did the litigators think would happen?

I agree. Unfortunately, a lot of security tools get misused in general. (Don't get me started on CVSS!)

I like ASVS and hope that it becomes more popular. Other control standards like CAIQ/CCM are also useful depending on the application.

OWASP SAMM I haven't used yet but I want to have a look! My org uses BSIMM currently. Happy to see an open alternative.

Edit: To be fair, I've noticed "shift left" emerge as a buzzword alongside the popularity of DevOps and DevSecOps. There has been a meaningful improvement in tooling that allows for earlier testing, so I'll concede the new buzzword :)

SC = The state of South Carolina, for non-American readers.

It's a shame that the article doesn't define acronyms on first use.

Not any more... "The percentage of workers in the private sector whose only retirement account is a defined benefit pension plan is now 4%, down from 60% in the early 1980s. About 14% of companies offer a combination of both types." [1]

[1] https://money.cnn.com/retirement/guide/pensions_basics.money...

An important distinction to make with GE is that most of their pension plan is "defined benefit" as opposed to "defined contribution". The latter is much more common nowadays because it avoids these massive long-term obligations to the company.

EDIT: Added "most of". A percentage of their employee base has already transitioned to defined contribution.

Capitalism may appear to be going obsolete only because our society has been corrupted with too much corporatism.

Society has learned the hard way how much our data is worth, similar to how we slowly learned the danger of cigarettes. Demand, unfortunately, remains. So, suppliers will exist to sell what is in demand. Facebook's market share is not invulnerable, however!

The ideology of generating shareholder profit "has caused immeasurable harm"? Really? The author is casting aside decades of economic growth, peace, and innovation.

> New policies could ensure that all the stakeholders who collectively generate a corporation’s prosperity then benefit from its wealth.

I don't agree with this slight-of-hand. Employees are stakeholders, sure; they will lose their job if a company goes under, and may not get a promotion if growth at the company stops. But they are NOT owners of the company in equity terms.

"It was useless to argue, she thought, and to wonder about people who would neither refute an argument nor accept it."

You have many allies, but they are doing more productive things than arguing with senseless people on social media :)

Re: Handling "crazy political extremist thoughts" on Facebook, I tend to either engage in a calm and reasonable reply that resembles the Socratic Method, or simply unfollow the person. It depends on how well I know them and how reasonable they tend to be. My best/closest friends are all reasonable people which is why I chose them as friends, so no contradiction there.

Twitter is worse, yes.

Reddit is OK if you avoid political subreddits and keep it light. I've curated my subs to be just that and it's delightful.

I believe that we shouldn't "need" social media (as other comments here pointed out, an external locus of control or validation is unhealthy), but rather we should use social media. Have a purpose whenever you open the app, even if it's just passing the time (Reddit).

I generally take "[h]andling your own problems" to mean taking responsibility for your own problems.

I'm seeing a lot of agreement in this thread, though. Healthy, deep relationships with family and close friends are important to keep you grounded, and therapy can help everyone. Many seemingly desirable positions of status that men and women strive for involve incredible amounts of stress, and people naturally have differing levels of stress tolerance, so at some point self-knowledge becomes very valuable. Having good people around you is a great way to build that self-knowledge.