

This post was reported with the reason āNot sure if this community has rules to keep the original headlineā¦.?ā To be clear: We donāt.
This post was reported with the reason āNot sure if this community has rules to keep the original headlineā¦.?ā To be clear: We donāt.
I feel like there was time when nerds who hung out on blogs didnāt automatically believe everything a CEO said.
Finally a use case for āAIā: defrauding community colleges.
sigh
To reduce the traffic to their serverā¦
A human who is not me, a carrot, a potato, and I need to cross a river. There is a boat that can only carry 3 things across the river. I cannot be left alone because if I am, I will run away. How does the human get us across the river
The response:
Hereās how the human can get everyone across the river:
Trips:
Trip 1: The human takes the carrot and the potato across the river. Trip 2: The human returns alone. Trip 3: The human takes you across the river. Trip 4: The human returns with the carrot. Trip 5: The human takes the potato across the river. Trip 6: The human returns alone. Trip 7: The human takes the carrot and you across the river.
Explanation:
This solution ensures that you are never left alone on either side of the river. The human acts as the ferry, carefully transporting the items and you while always being present to prevent your escape.
As noted earlier, I have a monograph published with Springer, so this rankles in a personal way.
āIām a moderate Holocaust denier.ā āCurtis Yarvin
deleted by creator
wake up babe, new Yud profile pic just dropped
(And by ājustā I mean āsometime in the past three weeks or soā. I donāt skim his exTwitter feed for sneerables very often.)
Typo:
Thorat didnāt look hrough his āownā book either
It would appear CNN was also at the eugenics conference? Why are all these mainstream news orgs at a 200-person event where all the speakers are eugenicists and racists?
https://bsky.app/profile/bmceuen.bsky.social/post/3lmmtefdl422j
And in response to an Atlantic subhead saying āPerpetuating humanity should be a cross-politics consensus, but the left was mostly absent at a recent pro-natalism conferenceā:
yeah, weird that the left wasnāt present at the Fourteen Words conference
https://bsky.app/profile/jamellebouie.net/post/3lmmqjx3fdc2e
yet I hold
space for it
As a wise friend of mine said years ago, when hipsters drinking PBR were having a cultural moment, āYou can say youāre drinking piss beer āironicallyā, but at the end of the day, youāre still drinking piss beer.ā
Having read all the Asimov novels when I was youngerā¦
The Caves of Steel: human killed because he was mistaken for the android that he built in his own image.
The Robots of Dawn: robot killed (positronic brain essentially bricked) to prevent it from revealing the secrets of how to build robots that can pass for human. It had been a humanās sex partner, but that wasnāt the motive. No one thought banging a robot was that strange; the only thing that perturbed them was the human getting emotional fulfillment from it (the planet Aurora is a decadent world where sex is for entertainment and fashion, not relationships).
The Naked Sun: the villain manipulates robots to commit crimes by having multiple robots each do a part of the task, so that the āa robot shall not harm a human beingā software directive is never activated. He tries to poison a man by having one robot dose a water carafe and another unknowingly pour from it, but being a poisoning noob, he screws up the dosage and the victim lives. His only successful murder involves a human as well; he programs a robot to hand a blunt object to a human during a violent quarrel with the intended victim.
Larry Gonickās Cartoon Guide to the Computer is in part a time capsule from a bygone age, and also an introduction to topics of enduring importance. Itās a comic book that explains how to design a Boolean circuit to implement an arbitrary truth table.
Etymology is not destiny. Otherwise, naughty children would be full of nothing, and (Borgesā example) sarcophagi would be the opposite of vegetarians. So, Moldyās argument would be bad even if it were founded on linguistic facts, which it isnāt.
āConspiracyā is a colorful way of describing what might boil down to Gagniuc and two publicists, or something like that, since one person can hop across multiple IP addresses, etc. But, I mean, a pitifully tiny conspiracy still counts (and is, IMO, even funnier).
A comment by Wikipedia editor David Eppstein, theoretical computer science prof at UC Irvine:
Despite Malparti warning that āit would be a waste of time for everyoneā I took a look at the book myself. 60 pages of badly-worded boring worked examples with no theory before we even get to the possibility of having more than two states. As Malparti said, there is no theory, or rather theory is alluded to in vague and inaccurate form without any justification. For instance the steady state (still of a two-state chain) is first mentioned on 46 as āthe unique solutionā to an equilibrium equation, and is stated to be āeventually achievedā, with no discussion of exceptional cases where the solution is not unique or not reached in the limit, and no discussion of the fact that it is never actually achieved, only found in the limit. Do not use for anything. I should have taken the fact that I could not find a review even on MR and zbl as a warning.
Itās been a while since Iāve seen a math book review that said āDo not use for anything.ā
āThis book is not a place of honorā¦ā
Sometimes, checking the Talk page of a Wikipedia article can be entertaining.
In short: There has been a conspiracy to insert citations to a book by a certain P. Gagniuc into Wikipedia. This resulted in said book gaining about 900 citations on Google Scholar from people who threw in a footnote for the definition of a Markov chain. The book, Markov Chains: From Theory to Implementation and Experimentation (2017), is actually really bad. Some of the comments advocating for its inclusion read like chatbot (bland, generic, lots of bullet points). Another said that it should be included because itās āthe most reliable book on the subject, and the one that is part of ChatGPT training setā.
This has been argued out over at least five different discussion pages.
Iād say that Scott Adams posting under a pseudonym on Metafilter about how Scott Adams was a certified genius was the most entertaining heās ever been.
No, he didnāt. His āexplanationsā are turgid and useless even when theyāre not just mathematically wrong. They create the feeling of understanding for some readers ā those who want their self-image of smartness validated, who imagine that LessWrong is the cool kidsā table, and who arenāt actually tested on how much theyāve learned.
No, he uses his fucking Time Turner.
OK, zero notes there.