I never had any trouble setting up or working with venvs. I don't even feel the need to learn what uv is because it's such a non problem for me.

I only use Firefox over Chrome because it has adblock. So where does the $150 million comes from if people won't use it without adblock? Seems comrade didn't think this through...

Human brains might not be explained by the same type of math AI is explained with, but it will be some kind of math...

Human brains and experiences seem to be constrained by the laws of quantum physics, which can be simulated to arbitrary fidelity on a computer. Nit sure where Godel’s incompleteness theory would even come in here…

how are we going to deduce/measure/know the initialization and rules for consciousness? do you see any systems as not encodable/simulatable by quantum?

I think you are asking whether consciousness might be a fundamentally different “thing” from physics and thus hard or impossible to simulate.

I think there is abundant evidence that the answer is ‘no’. The main reason is that consciousness doesn’t give you new physics, it follows the same rules and restrictions. It seems to be “part of” the standard natural universe, not something distinct.

Brain damage? If thought was outside physics, it would be a bit more durable than Humpty Dumpty.

you may consider reading I am a strange loop for that, which can do far better justification than myself

if there's surely no algo to solve the halting problem, why would there be maths that describes consciousness?

Can you look at any arbitrary program and tell if it halts without running it indefinitely? If so, you should explain how and collect your Nobel. Telling everybody whether the Collatz conjecture is correct is a good warm up. If not, you can’t solve the halting program either. What does that have to do with consciousness though?

Having read “I Am a Strange Loop” I do not believe Hofstadter indicates that the existence of Gödel’s theorem precludes consciousness being realizable on a Turing machine. Rather if I recall correctly he points out that as a possible argument and then attempts to refute it.

On the other hand Penrose is a prominent believer that human’s ability to understand Gödel’s theorem indicates consciousness can’t be realized on a Turing machine but there’s far from universal agreement on that point.

per halting problem: any system capable of self reference has unprovable (un)truths, the system can not be complete and consistent. consciousness falls under this umbrella

I'll try and ask OG q more clearly: why would the brain, consciousness, be formalizable?

I think there's a yearn view nature as adhering to an underlying model, and a contrary view that consciousness is transcendental, and I lean towards the latter

bro described the perfect LLM prompt that would have got him the right diagnosis instantly. instead he put in some garbage and got garbage back

I don't understand this kind of reasoning. You don't think that the 100s of PhDs that worked on this would have accounted for the riskiness of adding a live chickenpox virus vs not adding it? People need to start trusting experts more and do less of "common sense" over-thinking imo.

I'm in my late 40s, don't remember ever having chickenpox as a child, and I have a choice between getting the chickenpox vaccine now, or waiting til I'm eligible for Shingrix. Having seen friends get Shingles before turning 50 (and boy was it bad), plus watching some of their close family members get chickenpox from contact with them, I kind of want to avoid that stuff. But there's not a ton of expert guidance on whether the right move is to gamble on 50/Shingrix or to get vaccinated now! And when you toss in these dementia concerns, I'm even more confused. I think this would be a different calculation if I was younger, but I honestly don't know what the right move is for someone in my cohort. I decided to wait.

ETA: Someone in comments above points out that the data is still coming in on this question. It looks like the best move is not to ever be exposed to varicella (maybe me?), and the second best move is to be vaccinated with chickenpox, and possibly the ultimate best move is to get Shingrix, but there's a lot of missing data and some timing problems here.

I feel a lot of people think the "experts" are conniving in their offices rubbing their hands together thinking up ways to be diabolical.

To be fair to a lot of people, the "experts" have a long list of goddamn stupid and horrific things in the past to make blind faith in them questionable at best. Most recently, COVID highlighted the elite panic where they thought that lying to people about mask's effectiveness was a good idea to try to conserve them for medical workers for earlier shortages, along with making everyone waste time with obsessive cleaning against a threat they already knew didn't exist. They decided to try to be strategic and all they did was prove that they were willing to lie and thought that they knew better than you. Despite medical ethics including what can be best summed up as "don't lie to your patients, you don't know better than them for what is best for them".

Reputation is hard to build and easy to break, and well every decade there are enough events to break it even before dealing with propagandists and lumping all experts into the same basket. The experts said there were WMDs in Iraq too. Increased transparency combined with a less than stellar history means that institutions have fully earned their cynical reception. Horrifyingly is the damage that such misconduct has wrought, as even when they are actually 100% right this time people have reasons to doubt them.

no one gives a shit if a tweet fails to post. can't bring the same energy into running a country, can you

so like... a school?

In the same sense that a farmers’ market is like Walmart, sure.

I like this analogy. At a Walmart I'm more likely to find a good deal, and will encounter people who I wouldn't at home/work/friends, yet I prefer the idea of a farmers' market.

these companies are breaking the social contract. the society allows them and tolerates them making billions in profit as long as it's shared with the public in the form of good jobs. if you remove the latter part from the equation what's the point of these companies anymore? people are not gonna put up with this and something is gonna give sooner or later.

Society "tolerates" them because they have plenty of people willing to voluntarily give them money which totals billions of dollars for the bigger companies.

Jobs are a byproduct, not a hard requirement for a company to function, because the point of a company is to offer a service to customers, not to act as a jobs program for a town, state, country, or region.

I skimmed the article looking for a lifespan plot. Didn't see one. Instead it is replaced by a "proprietary multidimensional primate aging clock measurement". Take it as you will...

so you want to avoid using a framework in order to basically code something in pure JS that does what the framework does? whats the point of that?

I think the point is to not have to untangle another developer's middleware in a router from a bunch of state when all you needed was an anchor tag.

The point is to avoid dependency hell and take full responsibility for the entire codebase instead of delegating it to third parties.