Is some down-on-their-luck celebrity wishing you Happy Birthday in order to keep the debtors at bay really that special?
1,168 karma · joined July 23, 2019
Is some down-on-their-luck celebrity wishing you Happy Birthday in order to keep the debtors at bay really that special?
Please note that I'm a beginner programmer, so the code probably looks really ugly to professional devs. I plan on refactoring the code once I get more advanced in programming.
[0] https://capybasilisk.com/posts/2020/04/speculative-fiction-b...
I made a Reddit bot [0] that continually scans comments across the entire site for mentions of science fiction and fantasy book titles. It uses a dataset of book title/author pairs that were scraped from the Speculative Fiction Database, a compendium of all known science fiction/fantasy literary works.
If an SFF book title/author pair is detected in a comment, the bot searches YouTube for an audiobook of the mentioned title, then replies with a link to it should one be found.
The problem, you see, is that everyone believes they themselves have a firm handle on "reality", and everyone else is spinning a "narrative".
Deciding what does/does not constitute external reality is the whole issue.
Heh.
>Ironically, their paper arrived only months after a study co-authored by Viswanathan, da Luz and Raposo showed a catastrophic error in Viswanathan’s original albatross study. The wet/dry sensors they had relied on weren’t dry only when the birds flew: They were also dry when the albatrosses sat on their nests. Some of the longest “flights” in the data set might have actually been protracted visits to the birds’ nests. The study also criticized certain analytical techniques and claimed that albatrosses don’t do Lévy walks after all, and that it was unclear whether many species did.
The whole reason Facebook launched this challenge was to try and bury the bad PR over their data practices. If people in the external datasets had complained about the unauthorized use of their faces in the winning solution, it would've been pretty embarrassing for FB.
If we imagine the set of all genetic combinations that result in something that could be conceivably thought of as “human,” only an infinitesimal fraction of humans will ever be born through traditional sexual recombination. To be born is to win a lottery with astronomically long odds.
As biotechnology advances, we will be able to conceive and grow humans using completely artificial means (eg artificial wombs). Do we, the relatively tiny population of humans who have had the luck to be born, have a duty to the much more vast population of “genetically possible humans” to bring them into existence?
I think we do if we ever reach a post-scarcity society.
Three obvious problems: genetic mutations that would make a life unbearable, the phenomenon of twins, and the astronomical number of resulting humans.
I’m sure we’ll be able to identify extremely negative mutations and either fix them or abandon those genomes. The issue of twins means we’re not generating every possible human mind, but creating a reasonable sampling of that space (we observe twins have very similar life outcomes). To the last problem, I have no solution, I’m just assuming the Universe is spatially infinite with an even distribution of matter and energy.
BTW, it might be simpler to just simulate these humans, but I’m still extremely uncertain as to what extent a human in a computer = a human in meat-space.
Are we arguing that some users are just too important to adhere to the site's terms and conditions?
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/184253-ssd-shadiness-kin...
I don't think they've ever posted anything that puts computers and modern tech in a good light.
Tv from the 90s.
I don't know about Japan, but Australia allows in large numbers of immigrants.
But not as much as Schmidhuber.
If Nvidia was a human, they'd be the type to propose at someone else's wedding.
Recommended for fans of shoegaze, dreampop, etc.
Edit: Just noticed that list doesn't include the VG session. You can listen to it on YouTube: