The analogy between nuclear fission and quantum computing doesn’t really work. Fission was a relatively new physical phenomenon the Manhattan Project scientists were studying to turn it into a weapon of mass destruction on a scale that too had no precedent except in natural disasters. Quantum computing is a new technology that is supposed to make already effectively computable problems computable faster; it is ideally supposed to provide an increase in capacity, not capability. It should definitely be able to make tiny computations work before going for the bigger problems. That’s how all computing works, if it can’t solve simple problems, it’s never going to solve bigger ones. What you’re saying here essentially sounds like “there will be a magical event one day when quantum computing solves the biggest computing problems and we’ll all realize it works.”
I am not particularly invested either which way about the likelihood of quantum computing being a major breakthrough or not but this is seeming like yet one more area of computing research like crypto and LLMs which in recent years is increasingly being flooded by people on a hype train.
I didn’t say it wasn’t factually correct. I assumed it was mostly correct, perhaps a bit sensationalist for comedic purposes. I found it quite funny actually. My answer above was just that it was not actually written by the Elsevier company like that user seems to have thought.
This entire thread is making clear that constructivists want to speak on behalf of everyone while in the real word the vast majority of mathematicians or logicians don’t belong to their niche school of mathematics/philosophy.
First big disaster of its kind directly resulting in death, almost certain to get more attention. Plus it allowed for substantial propaganda points (probably well deserved) against the USSR during the Cold War, their opponents would have been stupid not to take advantage of the disaster to ridicule them for their incompetence.
Same here, loved the idea since I was a kid and I spend a lot more money on gadgets than I probably should but somehow managed to avoid getting a smartwatch because it doesn’t do anything a smartphone does better. I just wear a simple casio solar powered watch I got for about $100 which I never have to charge. I still like the idea of something programmable though, but this watch in OP is a bit too DIY for my tastes.
When terrorists like the Trump administration openly admit to it in some cases and threaten to do it in others, and we see the evidence, it’s easy to believe our eyes and ears over your fantasies.
What do jewish supremacists think of non-jews? See? I can play the whataboutism game too. Anti-Americanism might just be because of the repeated wars of aggression that harms the rest of the world.
The key difference (which I am sure you are aware of) is that the victims in your second scenario are foreign brown people. The comments would be very much like your first scenario if this was about Russians attacking even military targets in Ukraine for example.
That’s obvious but you seemed to be putting down foreigners for being able to stomach a million or more of them dying to protect their country from invasion unlike the enlightened democratic countries who couldn’t tolerate so many of their own dying for any reason. I think if tens or hundreds of thousands of soldiers from, say China, attacked the US, Americans would be very willing to fight to the last man to prevent becoming a vassal state of the CCP.
Perhaps the disconnect exists because some Americans have become too used to thinking from the perspective of invaders that they cannot possibly think from the perspective of the invaded?
It’s easy when you worship money and consider people of other races or cultures as less than human. Not that I am advocating for this view of course but a lot of Americans do even if they won’t admit it.
As opposed to democratic countries like the US or UK which would just lay down their arms after a few tens of thousands of their soldiers were killed in the event of a foreign military invasion on their territory?
I feel this as a guy trying to lose weight very seriously this year. On one hand, I can lose weight but I will forever be short unless a miracle occurs lol. I’ve made my peace with being unattractive for the most part, the attempt to lose weight is primarily for health reasons.
Or he was not comparing those two things to say they are the same thing but rather making an analogy based on the common factor of people in the US often wanting legal protections for both speech and privacy to draw his point that one is giving up their rights by making the excuse about not wanting privacy which they would probably not do when it comes to speech.
Thinking comparisons of two similar things are always for the purpose of saying that they are the same thing is ridiculous, don’t you think? It might sound like clever reasoning to people of a mediocre intellectual capacity but it is not logically coherent.
So the original blogger got slandered by an LLM agent, then got slandered again by a human journalist who used an LLM agent to write the article about him getting slandered by an LLM agent? How ironic.
But, does that mean he got slandered twice by an LLM agent or once by an agent and once by a human? Or was he technically slandered 3 times? Twice by agents and a third time by the journalist? New questions for the new agentic society.
Yet another very recent account on HN claiming to be Persian and speaking about things on the ground in Iran. Can’t you guys at least try a little harder to be convincing?
Not only the current administration, no US administration in the recent past or foreseeable future will not be okay with fighting wars for Israel at the cost of American lives and wealth. Some might hesitate or push back more than others, but the end result is the same.
And they’ve blurred it so much and thrown around the accusation so frequently and with so little hesitancy that many people are starting to simply not care anymore.
I agree about Israel fast losing support among the general public here but the idea of a less accommodating executive or legislative branch in the US for Israel is unthinkable. Not unless the system is changed from the ground up in dramatic fashion. The two most relevant branches of government in this country are completely beholden to Israel and anybody denying it is a zionist shill.
You guys really like revising history in realtime, huh? As if we didn’t live through that era ourselves. It was never a remote secret that Israel kept pushing the US to attack Iraq and had done so for years before 9/11, which Iraq had no part in anyhow.