Ah I see. I mean sure, that’s fine to consider and think through. Although, there doesn’t seem to be much meaningful difference between “replace it” and “figure something else out”.

But if the plan is to dismantle everything and wing it, I’m glad they volunteered their community to “figure something else out”. Im sure we can learn something from it. However, I suspect they will eventually circle back to having some system of law, some system to judge adherence to that law, and some system to enforce adherence to that law.

Still, I think there’s nobility in willing to sacrifice one’s own security (if not others’, which certainly is already the case in the current system) for the sake of those experiencing injustice/oppression. But there are also prudent and foolish ways to go about it.

In Canada we’re actually grappling with this tension leaning the other way, ensuring justice for those being processed through the justice system. Our bail system ensures people are not unjustly held for prolonged periods of time pre-trial, but the consequence is you have more cases of violent people readily released on bail who then attack someone else not long after. This is exacerbated by an inefficient system where trial dates take so long you’d have to hold someone presumed innocent for months or over a year, as well as an insufficient system without enough support and rehabilitation that helps minimize recitivism.

Okay, if it’s not either of those, what do you actually mean then?

That’s because you are most likely miscommunicating what you mean. When you say “abolish the police” I presume you mean “the current policing institution does not justly enforce law, ensure safety, or act in support public interest and therefore needs to be replaced with an institution that conducts policing justly and accountable”

What people hear is that you’re saying “policing as a concept is wrong and we should not have any institution that enforces democratic law or acts to secure public safety in accordance to a justice system”… Because that’s what the word “abolish” means, to formally and permanently put an end to something. Like “abolish slavery” because slavery is wrong.

Starship Troopers, Sergeant Zim

They’re just doing the same thing as the teacher and assuming the two pizzas have to be of equal size and therefore it’s an impossible situation.

The estimate is 130-140 aircraft existed in the entire fleet, so sounds like the former.

You need a bit balance of everything. I used to be snooty about small-talk. Eventually I started noticing that the most personable people, who make someone new feel welcome, included, and who make you feel like you’re noticed and worth remembering through recalling basic personal details–these people have excellent small-talk skills.

I think part of why small-talk often feels pointless is because people don’t enter into it intentionally, with purpose. If you go into it with purpose, like creating a good social experience for others, or building/maintaining 2nd/3rd order social connections in a humanizing way, it feels a lot different. Like anything, it’s still exhausting after a certain amount.

Sure, I don’t disagree with what you said. Some will say Applied Science is a category of science, others will say it’s distinct from capital “S” Science. I don’t really care either way, the distinction I was making was: Science is a process of developing knowledge that explains the natural/observable universe, including the humans/societies within it, i.e. a way of understanding what is. Engineering is the application of scientific knowledge, principles, and methods of inquiry in the construction and development of technology–it does not seek to explain things about the world.

I guess there was Foldit 😅

That’s engineering, not science. There is no science gameplay, you just have science points that you spend.

AI bad. But also, video AI started with will Will Smith eating spaghetti just a couple years ago.

We keep talking about AI doing complex tasks right now and it’s limitations, then extrapolating its development linearly. It’s not linear and it’s not in one direction. It’s a exponential and rhizomatic process. Humans always over-estimate (ignoring hard limits) and under-estimate (thinking linearly) how these things go. With rocketships, with internet/social media, and now with AI.

It’s less that it’s bad for her and more that it’s another way the US is dismantling their own soft power. There are long term advantages to having the rich and powerful from around the world get their upper education in your universities.

I would ask ChatGPT to review the source code and optimize it 😈

Nononono the solution isn’t for him to write that novel, it’s for him to write “The First Algorithm”.

Andy Weir found his genre niche and stuck to it. And within that genre niche, I find he’s a competent writer, both technically and I’d say artistically, with strengths and weaknesses. The combination has made his works genuinely enjoyable for me. Ernest Cline, while admittedly not for me, doesn’t seem to be in the same league.

The online comment context and usage of “Why won’t you debate, are you scared” suggests the response is directed at online trolls, people who argue in bad faith, and imperiously demand rigourous debate without offering the same let alone an ounce of intellectual generosity, i.e. sealioning. In contrast, something like a movie review is a structured evaluation is still an opinion, but it doesn’t deride readers for not engaging with it.

They’re not overbuilt, they’re overpriced. I know plenty of people in Canada who would do perfectly well in a 500sqft condo, and I can’t imagine there’s a shortage of them. I had a time when it was perfectly fine for me. It’s also true that such people can’t usually afford the asking price and those who can (e.g. >100k/yr) usually expect a lifestyle involving more than a 500sqft home. This is just the free market forcing the prices to meet demand 🤷

In 5 years, Americans who fuck up while visiting Europe or Asia and get deported will have a meltdown thinking they’re being sent to Latin America.

I think the threats, limitations, and harms already underway due to AI are very real. And it’s scary thinking how the issues will develop under the current ways such technologies get pursued and implemented to accrue power.

I also think we should be honest about the capabilities of the technology, the practical applications of it, and reconcile with the fact that the genie is out of the bottle. It’s the industrial revolution, it’s electricity, it’s the assembly line, and nuclear fission.

Well no, the AI doesn’t do the curating, the company running the AI-powered platform does the curating. Neural Net AIs aren’t built to understand anything. The company running the platform curates the training, prompt engineering, and non-AI structures (algorithms, rigid parameters, and basic rules) that hone the generative AI into maximizing the desirable kind of outputs and minimizing undesirable outputs for the specific field of tasks.