Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)B
Posts
9
Comments
743
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • If brains were just very fast and powerful computers, then neuroscientist should be able to work with computers and engineers on brains.

    Does not follow. Different architectures require different specialisations. One is research into something nature presents us, the other (at least the engineering part) is creating something. Completely different fields. And btw the analytical tools neuroscientists have are not exactly stellar, that's why they can't understand microprocessors (the paper is tongue in cheek but also serious).

    But they are not equivalent.

    They are. If you doubt that, you do not understand computation. You can read up on Turing equivalence yourself.

    Consciousness, intelligence, memory, world modeling, motor control and input consolidation are way more complex than just faster computing.

    The fuck has "fast" to do with "complex". Also the mechanisms probably aren't terribly complex, how the different parts mesh together to give rise to a synergistic whole creates the complexity. Also I already addressed the distinction between "make things run" and "make them run fast". A dog-slow AGI is still an AGI.

    The brain is not a Turing machine. It does not process tokens one at a time.

    And neither are microprocessors Turing machines. A thing does not need to be a Turing machine to be Turing complete.

    Turing completeness is a technology term

    Mathematical would be accurate.

    it shares with Turing machines the name alone,

    Nope the Turing machine is one example of a Turing complete system. That's more than "shares a name".

    Turing’s philosophical argument was not meant to be a test or guarantee of anything. Complete misuse of the concept.

    You're probably thinking of the Turing test. That doesn't have to do anything with Turing machines, Turing equivalence, or Turing completeness, yes. Indeed, getting the Turing test involved and confused with the other three things is probably the reason why you wrote a whole paragraph of pure nonsense.

  • It stuck in popular culture, but time and time again neuroscientists and psychologists have found that it is a poor metaphor.

    Notably, neither of those two disciplines are computer science. Silicon computers are Turing complete. They can (given enough time and scratch space) compute everything that's computable. The brain cannot be more powerful than that you'd break causality itself: God can't add 1 and 1 and get 3, and neither can god sort a list in less than O(n log n) comparisons. Both being Turing complete also means that they can emulate each other. It's not a metaphor: It's an equivalence. Computer scientists have trouble telling computers and humans apart just as topologists can't distinguish between donuts and coffee mugs.

    Architecturally, sure, there's massive difference in hardware. Not carbon vs. silicon but because our brains are nowhere close to being von Neumann machines. That doesn't change anything about brains being computers, though.

    There's, big picture, two obstacles to AGI: First, figuring out how the brain does what it does and we know that current AI approaches aren't sufficient,secondly, once understanding that, to create hardware that is even just a fraction as fast and efficient at executing erm itself as the brain is.

    Neither of those two involve the question "is it even possible". Of course it is. It's quantum computing you should rather be sceptical about, it's still up in the air whether asymptotic speedups to classical hardware are even physically possible (quantum states might get more fuzzy the more data you throw into a qbit, the universe might have a computational upper limit per unit volume or such).

  • The US has a treaty allowing people to travel to the US bases there, there's some language about not being an ass while travelling through but it'd be a pain to invoke for the crime of knocking on people's doors.

  • You’re a pedant about “pretty” syntax.

    Oh I'm definitely whinging about it but it doesn't make me stop using Rust. People coming from C or especially C++ don't really have a leg to stand on, though, neither do people coming from ML. It's Haskell people who get hit hardest.

  • You can do deep hierarchies in Rust, the thing Rust doesn't have is implementation inheritance. Or more precisely said implementation inheritance that relies on anything but the interface (traits can have default methods but they're part of the trait definition, not any implementation).

  • You definitely need something else than git for large assets, yes, its storage layer is just not built for that and they way art pipelines generally work you don't get merge conflicts anyway because there's no sane way to merge things so artists take care to not have multiple people work on the same thing at the same time, so a lock+server model is natural. Also, a way to nuke old revisions to keep the size of everything under control.

  • The gold standard for party bongs is shitpipes. Dunno about other places but for a Euro standard one, you need, bottom to top, 1x 100mm end cap, 1x 100mm sleeve (pipe to pipe coupling), 1x 100mm adapter to 40mm (the 100mm side should fit the sleeve), some length of 40mm pipe, some means to drill two holes, and two things not available at any random hardware store: a preferably metal what's it called in English the thing that goes into the water and some tissue to tighten that metal thing in its hole, wrap in a taper and twist in. Try to get an adapter that's angled, there's also ones with a flat step instead of (quite aggressively) tapering the diameter.

    Completely and utterly indestructible at least when it comes to banging it up. In principle also fit to handle acetone those Euro standard pipes are polypropylene but I wouldn't push it. Tons of water in there, definitely bottom-heavy, and very light when empty.

    You really don't clean it you let it get gunky, just replace the water, it's not like the gunk would dissolve into there. If you really have to, just spend what five to ten bucks on new hardware. Euro pipes should in principle hold up to acetone they're PP but eh, why. If it works it's probably still going to make the thing unsable for a week or so.

  • This is often an exercise for beginning programmers

    And non-beginners have to weigh the skill of the interviewer to figure out whether "To invert, I'll just keep the tree as it is" is an approach they can grasp. Enlightenment is realising that the tree is already in the perfect shape.

  • CVS was, for the longest time, the only player in the FLOSS world. It was bad, but so were commercial offerings, and it was better than RCS.

    It's been completely supplanted by SVN, specifically written to be CVS but not broken, which is about exactly as old as git. If you find yourself using git lfs, you might want to have a look at SVN.

    Somewhat ironically RCS is still maintained, last patch a mere 19 months ago to this... CVS repo. Dammit I did say "completely supplanted" already didn't I. Didn't consider the sheer pig-headedness of the openbsd devs.

  • Paper + pencil are still a programmer's best friend. YMMV when it comes to graphics tablets, but no fancy software doing anything but precisely emulating paper + pencil gives you that raw braindump interface, when you have to think about how to squeeze things into syntax you have a bottleneck that chokes everything.

  • Cognitive empathy, yes, absolutely, affective empathy, no. Difference between flinching when someone gets hurt and understanding that someone gets hurt, including the theory of mind to understand that they don't like that. Which is why the well-adjusted ones (mostly a function of nurture) make damn good surgeons. Maladapted ones will use that (very acute) cognitive empathy to do the usual dark triad stuff.

  • Even if that were the case, still better than being an imperialist like you.

  • And I'm referring to you consistently refusing to denounce imperialist aggression.

    The French (partly) dismantled their own bases, their own military infrastructure. Which is to be expected during a withdrawl, the rest has been transferred. Leaving when asked to is not an act of imperialism or colonialism, and neither is taking your stuff with you.

    If, for example, Russia were to withdraw from Ukraine and take all its tanks with them, that would not be an act of imperialism. Them staying, OTOH, is an act of imperialism: The have not been invited. You still have to denounce Russian imperialism.

    Did I already mention that you yet have to denounce Russian imperialism? You might want to do that if you want to have a conversation with the grown ups.

  • Flipping over the table on your way out does not signal a cordial exit nor amicable split.

    Don't flatter yourself. I do not fraternalise with imperialists, campist, non-campist, left, right, middle, doesn't matter.

  • People are taking naps in their car in a bank parking lot while charging.

    Missed opportunity, right there, because even the operators still think in terms of "gas station". Get a plot of land with a nice view, build a cafe, build a couple of charging stations. Make it a destination people want to go to regardless whether they need a fill-up or not.

    Heck, whatever happened to car cinemas.

  • There was no kicking anyone out. The government asked France to leave, and France left. That's not a kick.

    Still no condemnation of Russian imperial aggression. You know just because you're not using your lemmygrad main doesn't mean that you're not obvious AF.

  • Chad, as in the country, no. Chad, as in the powers that be in Chad selling it out to foreign interest, yes, they're very much at fault. The Déby dynasty (I guess that's how it's going to be now) is better than Habré but come on none of them are worth even a single clap of applause.

    Overall, that's some real neo-colonial, infantilising, BS from you, there, "Oh these poor undeveloped countries can't make decisions for themselves, they're at the whim of foreign influence, they have no agency". That's like 1/1000th of a step away from "we should invade and rule for them because they can't".

    Does your script not cover Africa? Is that why you need to deflect to another place entirely?

    No, Tovarish Vatnov. That is not the reason.

  • I'm curious why you're not giving specifics. Maybe because it's part of the Russian colonial programme? France left, willingly, when those states withdrew their invitation. They didn't force themselves in in the first place, they were there to fight Boko Haram and like ilk. The states had some reservations "The French are going to do all the fighting without developing our own military capabilities so afterwards we'll still be vulnerable". Germany said "yep we'll expect the same that's how they roll" so Germany went in together with the French, specifically doing training. Both left together once uninvited.

    And don't tell me they should've left bases etc. for Wagner to use.

    I'm curious: Is Russia currently involved in an imperialist, genocidal conquest of Ukraine? Yes or no. Once that's out of the way we can start talking about Africa.

    ...and don't fucking even begin talking about Uranium. Noone needs North African Uranium, Australia has everyone covered for millennia to come.

  • As to extractive capitalism: What part about "strategic autonomy" do you not understand. How can you be autonomous if you're reliant on extractive exploitation. Also, former colonies. Also, ask Mali whether they're faring better under Russia's thumb. France is not in the business of forcing itself on countries if they're hell-bent on making idiotic mistakes. The offer was there to help Mali keep out Islamists and extractive capitalism, what did the Junta do? Invite Wagner over so they can join in massacring the civilian population.

    France does have some homework to do regarding its colonial past, big and glaring one being the Haiti debt, but you know what you sound like? Like an ANC politician willing to blame your country's issues on anything but your own corruption. "Oh no it is the colonisers who make us embezzle our people's wealth".