I'm reading this book right now, and it doesn't make me enthused for the future. But I'm all over the place, I never know what level of doom-thinking to accept for climate change.
I've crashed a Lime/Bird at least 3 times, none of them related to cars or other people in any way.
1. Taking a pedestrian bridge off-ramp in the rain at max velocity because I wanted to see if I could take the corner going that fast.
2. Finding a quarter-pipe set up next to a bridge. How can you resist trying to shred it? It went well on run 1 thru 9. Run # 10, not so well.
3. Driving one home drunk at 230am and trying to drive it with only one hand.
My point is that it's pretty easy to fall off if you are pushing the envelope in any way at all. Who the hell falls of a scooter? Hah! Who the hell rides one exactly how you are supposed to? Totally boring.
I'm not sure how anyone could walk 5+ miles a shift @350lbs and not injure themself, unless they were that big from training for Strongman or the like. Humans are not meant to have that much fat.
This argument seems moot. I am not under the impression that it's difficult to go buy heroin or meth if you want some. Users seem to have no problem getting it.
I think about this often too. There are a ton of articles out there about it. It seems like it would require a pretty colossal amount of mass to get lifted into orbit, and then maintenance of a giant fleet of objects flying close together. Flock dynamics writ large. I've wondered if it would be easier to find an asteroid you can turn into sails (handwaving here about the difficulty of finding one, developing the technology to mine it & also spin up a space manufactory...) than it would be to make them all on earth. Who knows.
EDIT: I've sort of come to the conclusion that this is the only solution that a single-party could take on that would meaningfully decrease the amount of heat in the atmosphere. Everything else is dependent on a ton of other people doing what they need to do, too.
I'm building a sauna in my parents backyard. I've framed and sided a couple houses, but always with someone who knew what they were doing. Building even a small insulated shed (which is what a sauna basically is) from scratch w/ no plans, whole other world. Lots and lots of things I have to figure out along the way.
I understand that, I was a step ahead of myself in my mind. My question is better phrased as: why write legislation at all if you think the Supreme Court would very likely strike it down were it passed? What is the point of this effort?
Good point, we aren't generally allowed to own RPGs and attack helicopters, so it's not maximalist. However, RPGs and helicopters were not around at the time of the passing of the amendment, so I'm not sure we can that it is historically and textually accurate. For that matter, the guns this legislation would target weren't around then either, so I'm not sure how useful that criteria really is.
How does Congress expect to pass legislation like this when there is a 6-3 conservative judge majority who will almost certainly defend maximalist interpretations of the 2nd amendment?
I wonder if you could start small on something like this. Build a proof of concept, a search engine for programmers that indexes only programming sites/material. See if you can technically do it, & if you can figure out governance mechanisms for the project. Sort of like Amazon starting with just selling books.
This is spot-on for some of us here. I told my friend last week that I'd like to come work construction with him and will be quitting my decently-paying programming job to go do so in 3 weeks. I'd started to interview at another tech company and realized that I couldn't bear the thought of programming for someone else again. I burned out so hard at my current job I can't conceive of working anywhere as a programmer and enjoying it. So I'm going to go pour concrete and frame walls and hope that someday I'll sit down at a computer and want to tell it what to do again. I do remember that magical feeling. I just can't feel it anymore.
I've wanted something like this for a long time, and had resigned myself to using the algolia search, sorting by votes, and looking at the previous week. This is awesome. Thank you for making this!!!
I don't think anywhere in this post talks about whether or not Mattheij has looked at those events, read those books, thought those thoughts, and what his opinions are on them as related to Free Speech. Assuming the worst of your intellectual opponent is extremely uncharitable and doesn't reflect well.
from Gwern, @ https://www.gwern.net/newsletter/2020/05:
"This year, GPT-3 is scary because it’s a magnificently obsolete architecture from early 2018, which is small & shallow compared to what’s possible3, with a simple uniform architecture4 trained in the dumbest way possible (unidirectional prediction of next text token) on a single impoverished modality (random Internet HTML text dumps5) on tiny data (fits on a laptop), sampled in a dumb way6, and yet, the first version already manifests crazy runtime meta-learning—and the scaling curves still are not bending!"
It's probably not a state-of-the-art breakthrough at this point. Who knows what OpenAI has done in the intervening two years?