• 0 Posts
  • 27 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

help-circle
  • And that “no poop challenge” that was everywhere on lemmy about a year ago. Not sure whether that was a lemmy thing or wider, as I don’t use anything besides lemmy.

    I’m glad a local culture is growing here naturally, but I didn’t expect it to be beans, jeans and no poop


  • I actually like the idea of being able to see how many upvotes/downvotes came from specific instances much more than seeing the actual users. It would cover some of the positives mentioned in the github discussion:

    -Could help fight bot and multiple-account voting (if we assume that people who make multiple accounts do it on the same instance)
    -Could help identify voting-patterns from specific servers (obviously)

    And then if something looks suspicious, the admins can already see who voted, so they could check out whether some user is abusing the mechanics.

    I find that this approach might be worth talking about, but making user votes visible to all seems very unnecessary.




  • AccountMaker@slrpnk.nettoFuck AI@lemmy.worldIt isn't worth it
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yeah, but it doesn’t really help that this is a community “Fuck AI” made as “A place for all those who loathe machine-learning…”. It’s like saying “I loathe Dijsktra’s algorithm”. The term machine learning has been used since at least the 50’s and it involves a lot of elegant mathematics which all essentially just try to perform optimizations of various functions in various ways. And yet, at least in places I’m exposed to, people constantly present any instance of machine learning as useless, morally wrong, theft, ineffective compared to “traditional methods” and so on, to the point where I feel uneasy telling people that I’m doing research in that area, since there’s so much hate towards the entire field, not just LLMs. It might be because of them, sure, but in my experience, the popular hating of AI is not limited to ChatGPT, corporations and the like.





  • When people had analogue technology (radio/phonograph) there was no solid concept of the universe being a simulation

    I’d argue that Neoplatonism is very close to the idea of the world being a simulation. “The One” is a creative power that made all things, itself being beyond existing. That neatly corresponds to the idea of a machine simulating us, as it itself is not simulated, but simulates.

    Even Plato can be seen in that light. There exists a world of perfect forms, and this is but a projection = There is a reality the simulation is based on and computed. Our souls know everything in their pure states outside the bodies = The class is on the same level as all other data until you instantiate it.

    Of course nobody talked about computers, but the general idea was there. The simulation theory could be seen as just fleshing out the technical details, but the architecture was there for a while. Not that I necessarily agree with either, I just think that the simulation theory is not really a new concept in its core.





  • In his two dialogues that deal directly with love, he excludes sexual relations either implicitly or explicitly. In “Sympsium” love (eros) allows you to reach an understanding of the form of the ‘Beautiful’, and love creates goodness, and people can only ‘give birth’ (besides physically, also mentally by creating things) in goodness, so that’s why they seek it, to create and achieve some immortality through their creations.

    In “Phaedrus” he explicitly tells how one of the three parts of the soul (mind) is a wild horse that pulls the soul in lust, and reason (the charioteer) then proceeds to pull back with all its might as the emotional part of the soul goes towards sex, as love is there to remind the soul of beauty, which is the souls nourishment, not to “mount [others] like an animal”. That’s basically the tl;dr of his writings on love in those two dialogoues.

    Platonic solids are solids Plato mentioned in “Timaeus”.


  • Nowhere in your link is it said that “knowledge and efficiency” was lost by getting rid of the farmers deemed “kulaks”. What is mentioned though is that grain was being massively taken out of Ukraine, and the borders being sealed so that starving Ukranians wouldn’t leave, and that even after the famine started, the USSR kept exporting grain rather than use it to feed the people.

    The holodomor was a targeted weakening of Ukranians that could’ve been prevented if Stalin wanted it. Painting it as a story of commies taking away from the people that became rich because they were the best at what they do and that caused a collapse is sickening, and I really hope you try and reconsider whether the source where you got that is worth your attention and what were the motives behind twisting something as horrific as the holodomor into a cartoon story about evil commies and honest efficient workers.




  • AccountMaker@slrpnk.nettoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.worldPanik
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    But what about 14, 21 and 28?

    14 - 4*2 = 6, not divisible by 7

    21 - 1*2 = 19, not divisible by 7

    28 - 8*2 = 12, not divisible by 7

    Or did I misunderstand the algorithm?

    EDIT: I didn’t realize that you remove the last digit when subtracting, got corrected in the replies.


  • Is it, though? Every organ has its inputs, things happen and they produce an output (a reaction). Like the eyes receive light, physics happens and signals get sent to the brain. The brain also gets inputs from the senses and the states (memories), then physics happens and it produces a reaction, I don’t see where can we place free will here. Free will has to invoke physical signals in the brain, but where can it possibly come from? Even if the universe isn’t determenistic (and it’s not just our lack of understanding that makes it seem so), free will implies that there is another force (for a lack of a better word) that does complex social things.

    Whereas I don’t see a need for free will, machines are capable of gathering outside information, processing it and making decisions without any free will involved, why would megamachines like human brains need it then?


  • It’s long been thought the only reason there’s been no WWIII is because countries that don’t necessarily like each other have created mutually beneficial trade deals together.

    And then Russia decided to go to war regardless. I’m not sure whether this has shown us that war prevention based on mutual trade is an illusion, or that Russian economic difficulties prove that it works. Maybe time will tell, but in any case I’m not sure the dead will be happy that Russia’s economy will suffer.

    I mean, it makes perfect sense that you’re not going to start a war for economic reasons if it’s worse than just trade, but what happens when someone decides that they want war for reasons other than economic. For example, country A has a lot of people with their main nationality in the bordering countries, and someone stirrs up nationalist sentiments and they want their country to ecompass all regions where their nationals live, regardless of economic benefits/drawbacks.