So far I got the same "day after tomorrow" with that option. But it just seems a nice box the check when it doesn't matter.
1,059 karma · joined August 31, 2014
To be honest, I find the idea of classifying people from journeyman to master rather unsuitable for today's knowledge work. It does not pass the smell-test for gate-keeping.
What you need to know changes every five years. Call someone grand-master of software engineering, sure, but no matter how great they are they'll not get your CRUD database UI done any faster - if their career was all about signal processing for particle accelerators and medical device certification. More likely, they'll over-engineer and over-spec and not be prepared for requirements to change completely after a year, or for sinking several days into CSS layout issues. Beyond a certain baseline of experience (say, working five years in the field or so), what counts is knowing the domain well (interpreting what the customer wants). Or already having experience with the technology that applies to problem-of-the-day. Or being highly motivated to learn it.
It's not like crafting with wood. The nature of wood doesn't change every six months. The tools we use to work wood don't change every six months.
You can already hold all of humanity's written cultural knowledge on a thumbnail-sized drive. Recall is pretty accurate, too.
> revolutionizing humanity
Tell that anyone who lived 100 or 1000 years ago. World-wide instant communication. A cultural species of interconnected thought, a network the size of a planet. Augmented with tools of perfect memory recall, error-free precision calculations, way beyond what an unaugmented human brain can do. Welcome to the present. We even got remote-controlled robots working for us on other planets.
I'll keep my ad-blocker enabled, though. But allow me to think of it as a brain augmentation. We do what we always did: cultural evolution. We are creating tools to augment ourselves, not machines that are independent from us. As we integrate those tools into our daily routine, the tools are shaping our practice and needs. So we again create different tools, or ways of living. We diversify, then copy the successful. What's the point of creating a new god of intelligence? We have plenty of gods already. Let's maybe study and discuss non-human intelligence instead. (Edit: rewrote last paragraph.)
The goal of having a copyright law is not to create fairness. It's to ensure there is enough of an incentive that works get created, while still maximizing the public use of it. I'm personally for 10 or 15 years, but even 30 years would be okay compared to the absurdity we got today. This is so clearly only about protecting the profits of those who have enough money and power to influence laws.
Liberapay may not be as easy as Pateron, but especially with Patreon's UX getting worse over time, the major difference for me is now that you usually pay/renew each donation yearly.
Some people would also sell their right to vote for $5 if that was legal. It's not hard to make such a law. You simply could make it illegal e.g. to offer money for PII during a purchase that doesn't strictly require it. Or to not respect the automatically transmitted cookie choice. Those who oppose such laws are the lobbyists of the big companies, not "the people".
https://github.com/martinxyz/progenitor/blob/85260/crates/pr...
Just to be clear, this was the software that made the decision about cancellation? (Otherwise, it would be somewhat expected that flights of frequent fliers are less likely cancelled. I suppose they learn to avoid those flights.)
Yet for some reason, I bet there were fish jokes long before fish markets. The ad revenue may disappear, but the jokes will not.
Also, several open source projects make our society function that don't have a good business model. Or maybe they do now, but wouldn't have started if the author had worried about it.
Out of curiosity, I asked ChatGPT, and interestingly it added the following: "Fossil fuel-based power plants, such as coal and natural gas, can also experience disruptions due to extreme weather."
Now I wonder if this is true. Some web research brought up turbine failures at low temperatures. I'm sure that happens, but anyone knows if this is bad enough to be a relevant problem?
Welcome to the fediverse, where not everyone is on the same big server: There is wandering.shop if you're into writing. If you're into dinosaur paintings, go to sauropods.win. If you like math-art, it's very much on-topic on mathstodon.xyz. Try inkblot.art if you like non-conventional instances. Or genart.social if you like algorithmic art.
Those are just the ones I discovered by accident recently, without trying. Try picking a general instance you trust, and browse an artistic hashtag there. Also, most general instances are okay with art (try the #mastoart hashtag).
(Also the three instances recommended by .art when you try registering there. Probably not for you if you don't like .art.)
I don't think it's about pushing an agenda. Each instance can only set the rules for their own community. Dozens of art-related instances have popped up like mushrooms overnight, so there is a good chance people will find one where they agree with the rules of the house. And it's easy to move to another instance later.
Culture and rules: In this case this means how nudity is handled, whether anyone will care if you post spiders or gore without warning, some specific rules about AI-generated art, etc.
I can confirm that mastodon.art feels cozy and well-moderated, been there for years, also a financial supporter. Another sign that they care is that they've closed registrations, instead of trying to instantly moderate 3x the users. They've recently silenced mastodon.social, which again is mostly about calming down the local discovery features (you can still follow/be followed). They are blocking instances that encourage copyright violations, etc.
If you want an .art account, IMO right now you should start on one of the other instances they recommend, and move your account later. You can browse the local .art timeline and their view of hashtags without an account.
Growth has already been extreme in the last days: https://datasci.social/@estebanmoro/109370591683609825
I don't like the comparison to email. Email providers don't normally read or moderate your content, because it's not publicly hosted by them. The fediverse is more like a bunch of forums where the admins have decided to connect their users.
I hope there will be even more diversity in the rules and features between instances. When instances disagree about each other's rules or (lack of) moderation, they can reduce visibility or completely block each other. Some instances have already silenced the flagship instances, because they honestly look like a startled flock of birds in a too small room.
First it's just a nerve-path to prevent flinching back from the contact with something you wanted to manipulate. But once you have a fancy neural path that tells the visual cortex what light/objects to expect after you move your head left/right (maybe flee if it's unexpected), it's only a small evolutionary step to re-purpose this path, "execute" the same path while suppressing the head movement. So now you can process further what you are expecting if you move left vs right. Which could be interpreted as a step towards being conscious of your surroundings. (This is not 100% what the book says, but the idea I got from that chapter.)
On the biology part, if you never have heard of terms like "efference copy" it will be interesting food for thought about what consciousness might be, but no "solution" really. And you'll learn that an octopus is a ten megapixel screen, but that's just the first point again. If you only want that first point, there is also a "My Octopus Teacher" on Netflix, which is great in its own way.
If you wanted to read about human intelligence, I suggest "The Secret of Our Success" by Henrich instead.
That's one way of seeing it. Another way it is that you're part of this hive-mind of people who can afford to occasionally help a random stranger on a topic you care about. Other people do crosswords or sudoku instead.
As a consequence of helping that hive-mind to exist, you can also query it. But ultimately it is a limited resource, so attention and response quality can a be a bit random.
Yes, SE is heavily gamified, monetizes your contributions, exploits your sense of status/vanity. But it's the place where I least mind it. I like being tricked into writing about a topic I care about (refreshing my knowledge instead of scrolling news and being politically manipulated). I like being tricked into writing helpful answers (instead of controversial comments).
Personally, I only asked a single question on Math (but wrote a lot of answers on SO). Maybe knowing how it works helps, but I got an excellent answer (and the name of the problem I was trying to solve).