kbrkbr

Can you elaborate on the process by which you created this definition?

> obvious mathematical certainty

You mean like euclidean geometry?

Investors don't use this definition. For one because it contains something you cannot measure yet: consciousness.

How to find out if something has probably consciousness? Much less clearly? What is consciousness?

> So the ancient mystery of why we need sleep might have just been answered.

I would be very surprised if sleep would serve only one purpose. In complex interconnected systems you usually don't get far with monocausal explanations.

Inner emigration?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner_emigration

People want to scroll and scroll, because social media make them miserable [1, 2, 3]

Perfect storm.

[1] https://time.com/4882372/social-media-facebook-instagram-unh... [2] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-social-media-... [3] https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/navigating-the-maze/...

I can think of N as a process in a sense, because I can keep adding a number. But I can't think of R as a process like this, specifically because there is no surjective mapping from N to R.

How would you think of R as a process?

Maybe it's only me, but "cannabis scientists" seems another one of these nonsense words that content creators make up to make their product sound smart. It slowly diffuses into mainstream journalism, and I'm really sorry for the NYTimes if their readers don't know what a chemist or biologist is. Call me Don Quixote, but I think it's a slippery slope.

Put this way (P and GP) this makes a lot more sense. Thank you, glad you chose to share!

While I enjoyed the essay, I have my quarrels with it.

First of all the over-generalization: why would all successful people do the same thing? Why would there be only one road to succees? People are different.

Second: the lack of definitions. Is "leave everyone better than you found them" a goal? It would appear so. What about "leave no one worse-or-equal than you found them"? Looks like a constraint. And yet they are the same rule.

Lastly: the lack of backup. Except for some interpreted anecdotes, there's not much evidence there.

Points for creativity and engaging style. But could do more on evidence and clarity.

Or maybe you did not read it properly?

> Reading in that CSV file into memory would take Python 55.8 seconds, but PyArrow did the work in 11.8 seconds.

It's later clarified that Pyarrow does load csv here, though the numbers don't fully add up. Also the format change is explained.

Do you have auditory imagination?

I am asking because I was struggling with memory techniques like memory palaces. Turned later out I'm a visual aphantast, but I can imagine songs, chords, sounds.

Maybe it's just the way you function, and you just need to use other strategies?

That is true.

The point I wanted to make however was rather that ontology moved on. The creed stayed the same.

Medicine is still complex, but moved on a bit since the good old days of the four humors.

I'm genuinely curious. What would that be?

Judging by their creeds it's believing that Easter really happened, and that the highest being is a composition that must be explained in hard to understand greek ontological terms.

Assuming that you did not want to make the simple statement that their meanings or referents are different (because people usually don't doubt that), I can give you a counter example:

With all the studies finding correlation between smoking and lung cancer it indeed turned out that correlation was in fact causation.

Schopenhauer would disagree. In his world model the Will with capital W is probably best described as the driving force behind all movement. While abstract, it has concrete species (think color vs red, where color is will, and red is your concrete human will, that you can feel concretely by pinching your finger). About freedom of the will Schopenhauer also has a clear opinion: will is free in the sense of uncaused, random. That does not help humans though, because while they can do what they want, they cannot want what they want. I'm not saying that this is a good model, but it's quite concrete. Nietzsche build on it, Einstein had a portrait of him in his Berlin study alongside Faraday and Maxwell, and while Freud denied any influence, there are a lot of topics in common between them.

So that is what you think?

So I'm not alone falling sick trying to read in a moving car after all?

Well, I left academia 20 years ago, because of the perceived corruption and selfishness. I guess you just need to be lucky, no matter where you go.

Good luck anyways, I hope better times are on the horizon.

Overall, would you say it was worth it? I'm asking because I feel like I'm getting myself into a comparable situation.

"Throwing a die, a number higher than 1 is very likely." - "And yet I threw a 1."

That is no contradiction.

That being said I hope you can overcome the issues that make your life a struggle.

I don't think so.

"Nearly half of dictatorships start as a military coup, though others have been started by foreign intervention, elected officials ending competitive elections, insurgent takeovers, popular uprisings by citizens, or legal maneuvering by autocratic elites to take power within their government. Between 1946 and 2010, 42% of dictatorships began by overthrowing a different dictatorship, and 26% began after achieving independence from a foreign government. Many others developed following a period of warlordism." [1]

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictatorship (see "Formation")

On a far away spaceship a very advanced alien may be saying the same thing on their very advanced equivalent of hn.

Joke would be on humanity.

What became of d-ribose?

Half a year ago this was praised in a similar way, if I remember correctly [1].

[1] https://www.sciencealert.com/surprise-hair-loss-breakthrough...

How come I can run

!evince filename.pdf

when editing latex files in nvim after compiling?

And, but that does not defeat your point, :term shoots up a terminal in both under Linux.

I don't think it is weird. This button really has nothing to do with the product and it's use case as far as I can see.

That is what GP is pointing out as far as I can see.

I don't think analyzing the black square or Ulysses, or Arnold Schönberg's works (just random examples, I could go on and on) in terms of if and what they make you feel is an ill fated course of action. It's also not what people actually do.

On the other hand a lot of other stuff can be broadly analyzed in terms of making people feel something. Painkillers, excuses, hugs, titles.

So it seems your generalization is neither necessary nor sufficient for "human arts".

> "healthcare deserts"

Well, in Germany health care is affordable in terms of cost. However, while 20 years ago you just went to a doctor when you were sick, these days you will wait hours and hours even at your family physician's crowded waiting room. You need a specialist? 6 months if it's something serious like a cardiologist. If you're on private health insurance, alright, only 3 months.

I don't know if this is specific to Germany, or similar in all of Europe.

But that is a change many people notice that I speak with.

Valuable for whom?

No rational being left then.

In philosophy there is also the saying:

The modus ponens of one side is the modus tollens of the other side.

Meaning that when one side in philosophy says: from A (their body of arguments) follows B, and A holds, thus B must hold. A&B, A => B is called modus ponens.

Then the other side will say: from A follows B, and B does clearly not hold, thus A does not (or cannot) hold. A&B, ~B => ~A is called modus tollens.

Just wanted to add this here because that's how in my experience the discussion of such topics close to one's self tend to unfold.