shunyaekam

R is basicially a function from rationals to algorithms computing irrationals.

L_R is decidable by a master algorithm running every y of x#y, e.g. 3.14#<y_pi> runs y_pi(|3.14|), so y runs up to 2 decimals.

The master algorithm runs y(|x|) and then compares the output to x.

It halts correctly for every x#y unless you can provide a counter-example?

OP here.

Cool. Thanks for the link!

OP here.

Yeah, it's definitely about "culture". What I've been trying to express with usage of "God" is how primitive societies, lacking law enforcing institutions etc, tried to instil order through fear of punishment from a power no-one can top, not even the most respected leader.

I don't really have the time to take anthropology classes, but yes, that's what I'm interested in. There's something called "theoretical anthropology" which is spot-on what I'm interested in. Have you heard about it?

The big interest comes from me being frozen out by all peers during most of my life (grew up in a very dysfunctional family, ADHD etc), and I have been interested in social dynamics ever since.

I do standup comedy, which to me feels related in a way I cannot explain.

OP here. You're absolutely right. Thank you. I'm reworking the essay.

As I wrote in my top-level comment, what I really want to talk about is

> Is there a canonical parametrization of all social groups that describes their culture?

And not anything related to religion per se.

OP here. I'm reworking the essay quite a bit, e.g. removing the vector space stuff, and the clumsy usage of the word "God".

I've been thinking about these things for so long while not really discussing it with anyone, so there's this soup of associations that doesn't make any sense to any outsider, nor even to me, now when I finally put it down into writing.

Anyway, the essay title will be updated to:

> Is there a canonical parametrization of all social groups that describes their culture?

which captures what I really want to talk about.

If anyone else is interested in this topic, feel free to email me.

As an aside, I think YouTube Music is superior to Spotify in terms of music catalog.

You get "everything on Spotify" (high quality audio) plus the YouTube videos (eg mixes that are put up) in a battery-friendy player (possibility to go audio only on these videos). Of course minimizable with YT Premium.

I believe that the discoverability algo is much better with YouTube Music as well, which is important to me...

I pay ~$15/month (in my local currency) for YouTube Premium which also gives me the ad-free experience on YouTube.

The derivative of 1 with respect to x is zero, since the derivative of any constant function is zero.

So you must be saying that the derivative of 1/f(x) with respect to x is zero for any f(x), where f is a differentiable function, with non-vanishing derivative near x (for it to be defined in the first place).

That doesn't make any sense.

Please don't respond to this. It's getting absurd.

The answer to this question is answered in the FA. Leibiz notation is confusing except in the most simple cases.

For example:

> Isn't fractional form useful, for example solving differential equation y = dy/dx => dy/y = dx?

What exactly does "dy/y = dx" mean? What is on the LHS and what is on the RHS?

It acts like a mnemonic scribble for an intermediate step. It doesn't have any mathematical meaning.

What is special with the server? I was surprised you offered a community-hosted server.

An OpenAPI spec should be enough, right?

What is the difference in inner dialogue in happy vs unhappy people?

I guess the inner voice is what one strives to just observe and let be while meditating. After a good meditation session I feel less mentally tense (eg not clinging on to superficially important todo items).

Seems like inner voice is related to mental state in a major way. I have pretty severe adhd and am unmedicated so my inner voice is more like an old radio inbetween stations (= chaotic).

Therapy helps in overcoming pretentiousness, no doubt. This is an emotional problem, feelings of worthlessness, attaching one's sense of identity to how smart one is etc.

It's a big problem, especially among people with no life (family, self-care habits), eg nerds with no purpose.

Making up a term just so you can continue jerking each other off intellectually wont help you with anything.

No, I'm saying that caring about VI vs Emacs is nothing else than high brow gatekeeping/in-group signaling.

Tangent:

I've been programming for many years, and the old VI vs Emacs inside-marker/debate about which one "real" programmers use has been a constant for the entire duration.

(Because it is only one of those two. Any other is out of the question.)

Anyway, how much of this, quite frankly, non-issue turned important geek status marker is *not* about cargo culting? The programmers back in the day, real or fake, had to use some editor, right? I'm sure they would have been happy to use any editor, as long as it was free.

The programming profession is, in my not so humble opinion, a commodity profession by now.

What I mean by commodity profession: Exactly what you need to know to be a web dev (to take a prominent example) is well-defined since long.

Caring about small things like this just corroborates my point.

I think it is time for all status-chasers (?) aged 20-something to stop caring about ridiculous geek markers such as debating terminal IDEs.

Yeah. Some examples of niche content would be interesting.

In this context, a resource.

I cannot give you a specific gene but I think my point still holds.

Why would machines be interested in rivalry over resources or territory? Like a pond of water? Or women?

We can easily see why animals and humans are though.

My point is: Humans are status-seeking actors acting in our self-interest. It's literally in our genes. AI doesn't have this evolutionary baggage.

I'm certain AI could impeccably destroy humans. But why would it?

On the contrary, why wouldn't it defend us?

For example: Encapsule us in pods like The Matrix and build a tailored simulation to impose "AI communism", in order to protect us from climate change and each other?

Dopamine-adjusted with challanges every now and then of course, because we are still human.

Can someone explain to me why AI could potentially destroy to humans? What is the scenario(s) people are thinking about?

Unlike another big question such as whether God exists, we ought to be able to reason our way to the answer here. Since, after all, we're talking about an intelligence.

Congrats on your project!

I am also pursuing a dream of mine: standup comedy.

I believe strongly in the same thing: it's better to work on something you're passionate about and possibly fail than just continue doing non-engaging work for a monthly salary.

This comes across as judgemental and elitist. If you want finer content as determined by some group of gatekeepers of your choice, maybe you shouldn't read random blogs.

(I enjoy programming metaphors like the OP as well. URL on my profile.)

Anyone tried intermittent fasting while working out regularly? How did your schedule look?

What do they recommend over (something like) X/Twitter in summary?

I don't think microblogging would work in North Korea for example...

Sure but what exactly is a malicious scenario in this case? That they'd use this data to probe which drug to do R&D on?

If this was an insurance company I wouldn't have asked this question.

What is the big issue? Is the data not anonymized?