I believe GPT-3 has a transformer-based architecture. So it doesn't recursively ingest it's own output in each iteration. I believe attention-based transformer models have enough complexity to be able to learn what you are talking about on their own.
I don't think he is making any moral judgements in his analysis. It is you who are imposing your moral judgement here. He is taking a realist position here.
Yeah, this is the right place to fight about who has better tolerance for either extremes of heat without recognizing that people grow up in and adapt to very different climates.
When saying things like this, it is better to contextualize by giving some information about where you live. Some people live in areas where temperatures go as low as -20~30 C and not leaving the heating on can damage the house infrastructure. In other areas, where the temperatures only go down to -2~3C, you can get away with never turning the heating on.
Are you talking about a hypothetical scenario or do you actually do this? I am asking because as people start earning more money, lifestyle creep introduces new types of expenses. So they also have expenses to think about other than business class tickets. Most well-to-do folks that I know tend to spend more hotels than on the travel. Very well-to-do folks do spend on business class tickets though, but a $500k job doesn't fall into that category in my opinion.
I agree with the general point but in practice you will find a range of people with the same supposed responsibilities. Not all of them would be executing them at the same level.
Of course, this could be rectified by having finer grained titles. However, finer grained titles introduce their own overhead, introducing more politics/bureaucracy into the system (people at Microsoft would be familiar with this scenario).
It might benefit workers in general but I don't think it will benefit me as a software engineer. The salary becomes tied to the job title/level and it becomes hard for me to individually negotiate. When the salary is tied to the job title, it is also much harder to get meaningful raises in many companies because the promotion process is a lot more bureaucratic.
Even computer engineering is like that --- a bunch of neat ideas supported by an inordinate number of man-hours.
But since you are stuck as a CS Major, here are some areas that you might find interesting:
1. Security --- This is an arms race, so there is always something interesting to do
2. Machine Learning --- While this field is very hyped up right now, there are still many areas that need a lot of work. Things like robustness against adversarial attack
3. Quantum Computing --- Honestly, I don't have much experience with this. But this is one field where your interest in physics can complement your current major
That is ironic coming from a Canadian. Just recently, a lot of money poured in from Canada to support the farmer protest in India. Here is one example: https://www.gofundme.com/f/donatetofarmers
PS: Not that I support the current Canadian protests.
This was not just fake news, this was deliberate misinformation. A title saying 'FB threatens to leave EU' means something very different from 'FB lists EU regulation as a potential threat to business in SEC filings'
My knowledge about biking infrastructure is lacking but doesn't it make sense to allow/promote biking on the sidewalks as a start? Once biking gains more acceptance, allocating more budget for proper biking lanes would become much easier.
Not all religions are centered around the existence of a god though. A religion can be centered around any ideology, you only have to treat it as sacrosanct.
Yeah, I have the same concern as well. However, I felt that being able to visualize things in my head allowed me to solve some of these problems very quickly (in around 4-5 seconds). I can make the 2-d image collapse into the 3-d object in my head. I guess not having aphantasia would make you quicker on these tests? I must admit though, I had to look back and forth for some problems as well.
But each according to their needs in the end devolves into each according to their abilities. There was never a need for computers, there was never a need for the internet. I would say that it is tough to say whether there is any need for a person to live. On the other hand if you let people define their own needs, you end up with the scenario where one needs 1 billion dollars.