zeven7

Grandfather paradox says the riders on the ship won’t experience most of the time of the ride

The ones who behave that way don’t last long enough to be witnessed by new civilizations like humanity, hence the darkness

And then there’ll be a customer AI that haggles with their AI to lower the cost. And then PayPal will buy the customer AI startup and make deals with sellers to raise prices and share a cut. How dumb and annoying these extra layers of obfuscation over normal life will be.

FYI I see cars on street view for #2 https://maps.app.goo.gl/hPuDQRTfcRKBkmRb9

I saw a Brilliant job posting the other day. I was thinking of applying to work there. I randomly saw this comment, and now I won’t. So thanks for the heads up.

Maybe we are all just LLMs. If the books were written by a language producing algorithm in a human mind, maybe there’s not as much raw data there as it seems, and the total information can in fact be stored in a surprisingly small set of weights.

They don't want people in the US to travel outside the US so they probably see it as a positive if other countries put up more deterrents.

> "The main issue was whether or not something had to be directly perceptible (meaning intelligible to an ordinary human being) for it to be a "copy."

Why doesn't the same argument apply to a CD? or an MP3?

From what I remember, not that far from Peter Wiggin's character in Ender's Game?

Unfortunately this future seems unavoidable.

That is extremely concerning

Good question, and I think the misunderstanding is Buffett is speaking against, not for, tariffs here. I’m surprised none of the responses have spelled that out clearly yet.

He’s saying tariffs are making 7.5 billion people dislike us even more, and that jeopardizes our unique position in the world.

Could you expand on that? I understand the idea from the quote, but I don't understand why you left your job. Was it because you assessed there wasn't a need for high throughput quantum random numbers? Or because you thought it was wasteful? Or something else?

The concern I would have with relying too much on a source key to derive other keys from would be if one of the keys is leaked, the others would also be exposed. I don't have an application in mind, but assume some could exist where that would be a concern. Maybe you could respond to that concern. I don't know what use cases your company would have been targeting.

There’s a difference between (a) hiring smart people you respect and generally agree with to give you their own opinions and help shape your decisions and (b) hiring people who will go along with anything you say and holding their careers and families’ safety over the fire.

Laws matter less than they used to. When the President regularly uses the term "retribution" to describe his mode of operation, I don't blame someone for taking a more careful approach in a case like this. It shouldn't be that way, for a journalist. But a lot of things shouldn't be the way they are today.

Some things aren’t like that. GR comes to mind. (Hilbert was working on it also, but only because he started as a collaborator of Einstein.)

He’s not scared of the Russians. He’s scared of the voters thinking they should be scared of the Russians. When Zelenskyy said the Russians will come for America, Trump was angry because he knew it was going to scare voters and lose him support.

I get it. I think your fears are warranted. I appreciate your response.

Thank you, for both responses. There are little things we could quibble about further, but it's late, so I'm going to keep it short [edit: I failed] and then go to bed happy that you and I were able to have a discourse that felt respectful, well reasoned, and beneficial - something I've felt so lacking for recently. Despite being able to quibble about details, I understand a lot of what you are saying and agree with many of your points.

> As best I can tell, he’s mostly doing what the people who elected him expected him to do.

The one thing I'd like to pick at tonight is this. I don't think many of the people who voted for him would have agreed with all of this a year ago, but they get stuck agreeing with it now out of confirmation bias and because he's on their team, and they want their team to win. It seems more like everything Trump does is approved by the vast majority of his base, no matter what that ends up being.

Before the election I enjoyed the debate between Ben Shapiro and Sam Harris[1]. Shapiro's main point was that though he didn't like a lot of what Trump said, he liked a lot of what Trump did in his first term. Shapiro was of the opinion that Trump wouldn't do all the things he said and that his second term would look a lot like his first.

It is my opinion that, a month into it, Trump's second term now looks nothing like his first, and Trump is making good on all the things he said he would do during his campaign. Everyone isn't Shapiro, but a lot of people listen to him and think like him. Taking Shapiro as an example, I would say he was clearly wrong. But if you watch Shapiro today, he accepts what Trump is doing full stop. He's not out there saying, "I didn't think Trump would actually do all of this." He's acting like this is what he wanted. And, thanks to Shapiro's confirmation bias and a good healthy dose of audience capture, it is what he wanted - at least the part about Trump being right, now that "right" has changed.

Anyway, I typed way longer than I intended to. Thank you for a good civil discussion.

> I’d be happy with Obama v. McCain at this point.

Fully agreed.

Good night.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTnV5RfhIjk&t=3s&pp=ygUWYmVu...

Thank you for a non-malicious response, but (also respectfully) I am not a Democrat, and your response seemed to me more geared toward answering "How can I deal with policy changes that I disagree with?" I am more concerned about the potential for the complete capitulation of American democracy to totalitarianism than any particular platform issues. What's happening right now is only a small part standard disagreements between parties (the GOP banning trans athletes, rebalancing the budget, approaching foreign relations differently) and much more about half the country being entranced by a cult of personality while the leaders in a position to stop a president from becoming a king instead are bowing down to him.

> try to figure out why your message and candidate failed

I don't like Harris' message. I probably disagree with her on a majority of political debate topics. I am a centrist and would agree with her on some things, but I would have considered myself a right leaning centrist more than a left leaning centrist. Her message failed for me too. I am just dismayed that the country elected _this_ man. A convicted felon who has provably lied more than any other person on record in the history of humanity, who already tried to overthrow an election, is only self interested, a bully, a sexual assaulter, a conman, a swindler: _this_ man? And now he's doing what you knew he would do, and there doesn't seem to be any way to stop it.

I don't want to know how to get Kamala 2.0 to win an election. I want to know how to get back to Bush v. Gore.

Thank you for your comment. Overall, this lifted me up and helped me learn some more about what was in the Declaration. (I went and read it for the first time after seeing your comment.)

> deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

Unfortunately, unlike 1776, today's king was given power by the governed, and the majority (of those who care enough to vote) still support him. So I don't know where those of us who are horrified go from here.

> sort of Slavic accordion drum'n'bass

Interesting. Do you have an example?

Is it a canary? Does this mean the government has imposed on Google for use of it's AI?

I cannot parse this response

I've missed the stories on this until now. Is it known (and is there an ELI5) how they were able to do it so much more efficiently?

My daughter has a mild astigmatism (enough to where she needs to wear contacts) and can do the magic eyes very quickly… but maybe that’s only when she’s wearing contacts

“ Three of the panels are part of museum collections. One of the panels was donated by Unity College to the National Museum of American History in 2009. Another is on display at the Jimmy Carter Presidential Center. A third panel has been part of the Solar Science and Technology Museum in Dezhou, China since 2013.” [1]

Sounds like America chose “museum piece” from Carter’s options.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_at_the_White_Hou...

This comment is a riddle. Say it plainly.

How is it determined on chain if you’re validating on a fork?

I used to watch a lot of Go. I watched live as Lee Sedol beat AlphaGo in one single game in the last match a human could feasibly compete against AI. Against all odds, and knowing AI had overtaken us, Lee Sedol found a move to get one last victory. [1]

But I never saw anything like the crowd hype from the clip you posted, lol. This was next level in terms of the energy in the room. Very fun, thanks for sharing!

[1] https://youtu.be/mzZWPcgcRD0