seventhtiger

I've read users' reports of using that input stats screen to confirm 10 bit input.

They used a certified hdmi 2.1 cable to Nvidia 3090, and 3080 should also do it. Not sure if the new consoles are pushing 10bit but they should be.

Can't test it myself yet as my LG CX and Nvidia 3090 are in the mail.

Globally there's far more trust for institutions and authority than in America. Cultures which respect the elderly, the professional, and the official. Even beyond respect it extends to obedience in some places.

I definitely see it in my own culture, which is Arab. It's a double edged sword, and can be said to enable further oppression, but in a crisis situation it's useful.

I feel like needing structured environments has been increasingly stigmatized as hustle culture and entrepreneurship is increasingly popularized. It's not necessarily wrong but is it the best fit for everyone?

Of course if you are looking at a startup, needing the structured environment is viewed as a weakness, but the successful startup hub itself is a testament to how long a little structure can go.

I am someone who thrives in structure. For example, in academia, I'm not in need of resources, passion for learning, or direction. I simply need an instructor who expects things from me with hard deadlines.

For someone like me who reaches out for advice, all these self improvement methods of hustle and driving your own goals are really non-starters. I know I cannot consistently engage in them. From that lens I will always be a failure, although my work under various organizations is highly valued and well compensated.

The best way for me is to find the best existing structure who goals are aligned with mine, working within it to achieve maximum mutual value, and reassessing whether this structure is still the best for me, or looking elsewhere.

Not necessarily. English as a second language speakers who may have a accent or take longer to formulate their responses are at a disadvantage in person. I've met many who have expansive vocabularies and impeccable grammar, and I am one myself, but it's hard for us to get over the first impression of the accent and to formulate our responses with natural timing.

For us writing sets a level playing field.

The interaction surface between genetics and physiology itself is very complex and not well understood. The interaction surface between physiology and behavior is just as complex and not well understood.

It's not that we will never find any gene that affects behavior. We have, and we will. But to draw any big picture conclusion outside the scope of those specific findings is wild and decades if not centuries early.

Imagine if there was a truly incompetent and corrupt president, not Trump of course, then what would the media landscape look like?

Is it any different?

Did Microsoft make a decision here? I thought it was DMCA takedown which legally requires immediate removal.

The CEO is beholden to the board who are beholden to the shareholders. The CEO is generally not actually beholden to the shareholders (directly). Depending on the shares, the shareholders may or may not be able to actually influence the board.

Owning a share in coca cola doesn't give you a right to the secret formula.

I have worn the Bose QC35 II on a 19 hour flight. It greatly reduced the terrible hum of the airplane and the battery lasted all the way through (bluetooth and sound were on maybe 6 to 8 hours). They are that comfortable.

By compressible I mean containing any information not necessary to compute the next step.

That definitely would work for Earth today. But note that to simulate observers on Earth today, you had to simulate from the big bang up to (today - light-crossing time from body) for each celestial body.

That's significantly larger than Earth, only to simulate Earth today, because tomorrow the entire universe would go dark.

Lightspeed gives structure to the computation of the universe but it doesn't reduce the load.

Saving templates doesn't reduce the load either, not in the sense I'm considering. It may practically mean that you don't have to run it again, but theoretically if you want to know how much computation got you to this point then you have to count the computation of the templates.

So if you had our whole universe at your disposal, and knowledge of all natural laws and processes, and knowledge of the starting conditions, and absolute power over matter and energy, you still cannot simulate our entire universe with anything less than just restarting it. If you wanted to simulated it specifically for some observers, you can free up resources using the lightspeed method but that's a computational debt you cannot pay if you wanted the simulation to continue.

Energy and mass are free, but computability is fundamental. If denizens of the game of life discover their natural laws and calculate the computations their universe runs on, theoretically it should be the exact some as ours.

This example is great. My main point is that due to the laws of their universe, they will never be able to simulate any area of it in a smaller area, because the Game of Life isn't compressible.

That's true.

I'm only arguing against partial simulation within our own universe (eg. The Matrix). Any simulation that has a night sky and telescopes must simulate the full big bang and evolution of galaxies just for the people on Earth.

It's possible that a bigger universe exists that can simulate ours.

However I think whether a simulation of only the perceivable universe is not possible, which means you can't reduce the required computation. See my reply to a sibling comment.

If the universe is incompressible then it's definitely impossible to simulate it within itself.

This goes back to my thought on compressibility. The article's argument is built on the assumption that some data in the universe can be ignored and the whole computation made more efficient.

It's not a trivial assumption. I actually lean towards an incompressible universe, intuitively.

If the universe is incompressible, then you may only ignore parts of the data for a finite time. For example, arranging an illusion of the night sky might have taken no computation before astronomy, but as we record the positions of celestial bodies and understand the laws governing them, the computations have to be run retroactively since the big bang. Otherwise the simulation would be inconsistent.

So the question is what can you remove from the causal chain from the big bang to this moment? If you think some things are removable, you have to prove that something exists in the universe but does not touch any causal chain humans (or perceivers) may wish to investigate at any point in the future. If nothing is removable, then you cannot choose to not simulate any part of reality based on perception, because whatever you don't simulate may eventually need to be simulated.

They definitely don't exist within our universe.

Is the universe compressible? Based on what we know, are there efficiencies to be found in storage or computation of the universe?

Because the smallest simulation of something incompressible is itself. Assuming the universe is incompressible, it's impossible to simulate the universe in the universe. The smallest computer to simulate the universe would be have the size and energy requirement of the entire universe itself.

How many years do you think is the limit to being temporary and still being honest?

If they were giving 50 year H1B visa that are not guaranteed to be renewed, would you still say that it is the visa holder's fault for bringing their family?

If not for 50 years, then when should we start blaming them? How many years is a reasonable amount to put someone at fault for putting down roots?

Then where did all the contraceptive-using seculars come from? Hasn't our history already selected for religious communities with high birthrates?

Even if secular people went extinct today, there would be more 30 years from now. Religious communities can produce secular individuals, from which secular communities form that generate secular memes.

They operate on independent planes. Unless a sort of direct genetic disposition to specific ideas can be established, I believe the complexities of genetics and memetics allow for such a broad range of complex interaction that they cannot be correlated so easily.

I would agree with you if this were the national or even regional model, such as the case in some countries in East Asia. But it's not. This is a single school with a unique model that has proved succcessful and is being torn down. No one was being denied a highschool education or a chance to succeed over this.

Questioning the measurement of merit is easy when you don't have to offer an alternative. There's always something to pick at in every methodology, including every alternative you may think of.

If test scores didn't correlate to academic performance that would be embarrassing and really easy to show. But they do. Test prep is just focused studying. It doesn't have any hacks or shortcuts other than learning the material better.

You're starting with the assumption that you can't buy merit. But you absolutely can. At every opportunity in my life where the resources available to me did not support further growth, someone else could have bought more merit. It's still a meritocracy when that person is selected.

What it isn't is a pontetial-ocracy or a inherent-worth-ocracy, and I don't understand the argument for those models.

From my research into the topic I've labeled microdosing under "cool homeopathy".

You're assuming memetic information propagates in the same way as genetic information. Not eating or having sex has been used to great memetic success historically.

Thank you. This helps a lot. I didn't think to look for it.

I really hate those. When your house is dark and it's calm and all you see are little eyes of Sauron floating in the darkness. I've gone around my house with masking tape and covered every unnecessary visible light.

Google Wifi is one of the worst offenders. They might as well market it as a wifi-repeating lamp.

Can Europeans say the same, or should they block Google and Facebook?

I heard this a lot in the WiiU era, but having this opinion during the Switch? It's the most unique and successful console. If Nintendo drops their hardware we will only have phone to play with on the go, and it's obvious why people prefer and are willing to spend much more on quality handheld gaming hardware.

I stopped using Samsung's clock alarm for this reason. It's quite hard to figure out as a heavy sleeper whether actually only 1 of my 5 alarms went off or I was just sleeping through them.

One day I just stared at the clock app, not ringing, as my alarm time came and went. At least validated all those times I've doubted myself.

Downloaded AMDroid now. Much better, and much more customizable, and it turns out I never actually sleep through an alarm, they just never went off.

I also got really good at multiplying 2-digit numbers in a sleep-daze.

Trackpads are really un-ergonomic when they're attached to the laptop. Both your wrist and neck are bent because the trackpad and screen are attached that way.

Consider getting a separate USB trackpad and putting it in a "mouse like" position so your wrist is straight and you can raise the laptop to just under eye level.

This sounds true and I've seen it in action. But I always wonder about the implications.

Must we keep our most important measures target free? That sounds insane, although I can see how it would improve the measurement.

So the questions is how are we supposed to set targets without our most important measures?