It’s crazy that this is real. It looks like a comic someone would make to make fun of the idea. Like the fact that they’re watching some guy shoot someone, then the burger commercial comes on and the guy stands up and cheers “McDonalds!” Before sitting back down to watch more of guy shooting other guy.
This is peak “dumb Americans” humor, and they’re using this unironically to describe their business idea.
Yeah. I don’t know what the % breakdown is, but I get the sense that while the general community is inherently anti-corporate/anti-commodification, there are some that view this in the left wing sense of communities supporting each other and some who view this more of as a consumption/voting with your wallet individualized choice. They recognize that some or even all corporations are bad, but think opting out of those structures without directly challenging them is all that they need.
But like I said, idk what the actual distribution of these views are. It’s just the sense I get from seeing some of the comments.
Yeah. It’s more like:
Researchers: “Look at our child crawl! This is a big milestone. We can’t wait to see what he’ll do in the future.
CEOs: Give that baby a job!
AI stuff was so cool to learn about in school, but it was also really clear how much further we had to go. I’m kind of worried. We already had one period of AI overhype lead to a crash in research funding for decades. I really hope this bubble doesn’t do the same thing.
I am tired of living in a world with all of these problems. Whether or not I have the luxury to ignore them is besides the point.
Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra.
One of the banks involved in the financial meltdown of 2008.
“Spends more on groceries than on other categories” so they’re poor. You can just say that. It turns out your money needs to go to keeping you alive before it goes to other things, and if you don’t have much money left after that, you can’t exactly spend more than you spent on food on other things.
Imagine being a consultant and get paid to write completely pointless things like that.
Anyone got a recommendation for an open source alternative to discord? Basically just need voice, text, and screen sharing for a group of friends of like, 5-6 at most on at any time.
Even if I gotta pay to host a server, I’d rather do that than pay discord extortion money to avoid ads while still getting my data stolen.
Ok, sorry about that. I’m more than happy to update it if you want to give me some constructive feedback on what was confusing about it. Note though that this was the 3rd part in the series, and maybe you didn’t go back and read the previous 2 parts? They start here
NP. I’m not really great at giving writing advice, so can’t really help there. Something about it just didn’t click when I read it. The extra context you linked did help a bit.
As far as the issue: After reading it I think it does just seem to be a matter of terminology mixed with problems that arise with when you need to write math expressions inline in text. If you can write things out on paper or use a markdown language, it’s really easy to see how a fractional expression is structured.
2(1+3)
is a lot easier to read than 8/2(1+3) even if they technically are meant to be evaluated the same. There’s no room for confusion.
And as for distributive law vs multiplication, maybe this is just taking for granted a thing that I learned a long time ago, but to me they’re just the same thing in practice. When I see a(x+1) I know that in order to multiply these I need to distribute. And if we fill in the algebraic symbols for numbers, you don’t even need to distribute to get the answer since you can just evaluate the parentheses then use the result to multiply by the outside.
Conversely, if I was factoring something, I would need to do division.
a
= x+1, thus: a(x+1)
I think we’re basically talking about the same thing, I’m just being a bit lose with the terminology.
And while we’re at it, the best way to make sure there’s no misunderstanding is to just use parenthesis for EVERYTHING! I’m mostly kidding, this can rapidly get unreadable once you nest more than a few parens, although for these toy expressions, it would have the desired effect.
(8)/(2(1+3)) is obviously different than (8/2)(1+3)
This is why there’s that trope where the bad guy gets killed in the process of, or just after, getting redeemed. So the story can have its cake and not have to deal with any of the icky justice afterwards. How jarring would it be to have the bad guy turn around, save the day, and then the heroes still kill them or drag them off to a trial for their crimes? So justice has to be meted out by fate rather than having to complicate our heroes.
Something about the way this thread was written was kind of confusing, so I don’t really get what their point was. Is it just that the terminology is wrong? Or am I missing something?
Like, whatever you call it, a x b, a*b, ab, and a(b) are all acceptable notations to describe the operation “multiply a and b.” Some are nicer to use than others depending on the situation.
-Will edit with more in a bit.
*when was the last time they did it in America?
Spoilers for a really old game I never got around to playing. /s
Nobody is saying it isn’t. But if you genuinely care about the harm it causes and don’t just want an excuse to throw political enemies in jail, then the solution is obviously not to criminalize its use. The correct thing to do is to provide social and health services to addicted people to get them off of it.
All criminalization does is ruin the lives of the people it targets and enrich the prison industry.
Calls for individualized actions on smaller contributors to climate change is the stalling tactic. Oils companies popularized the idea of personal carbon footprint as a way to steer attention away from their larger role in climate change. Instead of organizing to end fossil fuel use, create infrastructure to reduce our dependence on cars, or cutting back on the US war machine, people instead focus on changing their spending habits in minor ways that won’t fix anything but will give them catharsis and social capital. And for people who are even less committed to climate action, they see people pushing for these kind of things and they just see people telling you to give up stuff you like or even depend on for no reason.
Climate change is an emergency that we’re running out of time to fix. We need massive, society wide changes if we’re going to avoid catastrophe. Little incremental changes are not only insufficient to solve the problem, they reduce the political will needed to make the necessary changes.
For me, I just recognize that AI, or any technology isn’t the problem. It’s context it exists in, who gets to use it, and how.
We shouldn’t have to choose between automating boring or dangerous jobs and letting people live dignified lives free from the fear of poverty. We shouldn’t have to choose between having AIs that can generate all sorts of interesting media quickly (even if a lot of it isn’t that good yet, it can still serve its purposes, like say, quickly mocking up an idea to see if it’s worth going forward with it.) and ruining the livelihoods of the real artists that made it possible. We also shouldn’t have to deal wit the mountain of garbage that will be created and shoved in our faces by corporations that don’t understand what the limitations of the technology are.
These are all capitalism problems. We should probably do something about that instead of asking dumb questions like if AI can really make “art” or if it’s copyright infringement.
It strikes me as a mostly non-technical problem. As a method of interfacing with computers/games it just doesn’t offer anything that useful and runs into a lot of practical problems that won’t magically get better with faster processors or smarter software.
I mean sure. Anything someone is using like currency can be called currency. But we’re talking practical terms here. Things we “collectively agree to value.” My WoW gold might be useful for buying potions, but it’s not generally accepted anywhere outside that narrow context. The fewer people who are willing to accept the currency, the less useful, and arguably less “real” it becomes, in so far as currency is defined by its value to others. I could print “me bucks” that I value at $1B USD, but that doesn’t mean much if nobody will give me a sandwich for it.
I hope this is just a joke and she didn’t dox her mom for internet points.