ablatt89

It makes sense, even Picard almost believed there were 5 lights!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jk3EsXgXcyQ

Don't worry, Clownlon will quickly rewrite the Twitter API service this weekend, make it as "beautiful as Niagra Falls", and hand it off to the Twitter engineers to maintain.

Higher ups from these companies complain about lack of "high IQ" talent yet don't want to budge on offering competitive salaries. I have a smart friend who worked for ASML as a contractor, and they would give him empty promises of bringing him on full time, as if he still needed to prove himself despite being over qualified.

Complete clownshow from these upper managers. If workers aren't entitled to a job, you're not entitled to high IQ talent, dumbasses!

100% agreed. Understanding calculus lets one understand rates of change and thereby modeling. If you know the fundamentals of modeling via calculus, the understanding of so many things opens up and goes beyond just being able to understand things at a high level.

Good for the engineer who is an expert in those audio and video testing and can get hired for the role. We should be thankful engineering has provided many folk who were previously poor, an opportunity to rise to the middle class simply by studying and being smart.

I linked an article above, I suggest you read it before asserting that my issues with solar are simply irrelevant. Here are others:

https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/germanys-stress... https://fee.org/articles/solar-panels-produce-tons-of-toxic-... https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abj6734

You cannot simply ignore and hand wave off "inconvenient facts" because you have a strong dislike for "climate deniers".

Is it really scripting or just feeding the code into the swift cli which then compiles it? I recall writing Swift scripts also, and when feeding it into the swift cli, there was some time delay that was comparable to compiling the program. Whereas something like Python or JS is nearly instant when running a script, the swift cli would take some type before the computation would happen.

I don't think that comparison is fair at all. You're comparing concerns of a technology and how it scales, to how no one talks about physical keyboards and smart phones? That's not even remotely the same and is pretty dishonest to make that comparison.

The problems of solar as a scalable renewable are very fair to talk about, considering that Africa and India NEED energy to grow their societies. The only solutions that scale are oil or nuclear. The idea you can just hand wave any concerns about renewables doesn't seem very rationale if you genuinely care about the problem.

Solar on earth makes sense in some contexts, but there's questions of how it's not scalable, clean up methods, local climate effects, is intermittent and causes the power grid instability. These are fair questions that should be looked at and solar on earth is not some solution to the problem of gas without tradeoffs, but these questions and concerns are usually ignored.

https://www.nrel.gov/news/features/2020/renewables-rescue-st...

These concerns are not really brought up by the media.

Lots of conflicting views held by the scientific community:

* Science is progressing too fast * Science is progressing too slow with not enough breakthroughs * The barrier to publish is too high and is wrought with politics * There's too many papers published and we need a higher bar as not everyone is a genius * My research is important and deserves funding * Others research is trivial and they don't deserve funding * Committees suck, they do nothing, just gate-keep who gets money and there's politics involved * X research is trivial, shouldn't receive funding, someone has to stop this * The public should understand what we're doing research on * A lot of the research being published is being exaggerated in quality, difficulty and correctness

I guess it's no different than the conflicting views of any community. If there's no conflict, things get stale.

I think if you can write some pseudocode that summarizes the computation, it would help. I think I and others have seen the Github repo, but generally don't know where to start to analyze what it's doing.

For example, for computer security, if you write a stochastic algorithm pseudocode such that the cellular automata are essentially doing a "search" for something, an that the cellular automata replicate and scale for the purpose of this stochastic search, I think that would help people understand your computational model better. At least for me!

Pretty funny how often when one brings up engineering challenges to solar, the challenges are ignored or handwaved. There's not even a back of the envelope calculation to prove the solution is scalable, maintainable, or cost effective the solution, it's all just feel good, "cool" factor, "saving the world" factor that's used to argue for investigation.

It looks like the paper specifically claims to create an optimized quantum algorithm for SR pair finding which is most time consuming part the Schnorr fatoring algorithm. It starts with a classical computational lattice problem, defines the optimization problem in a specific form (3), and then maps it to a Hamiltonian to represent a lattice matrix and a PauliZ matrix ((1, 0), (0, -1)) (4) and if we have a Hamiltonian, we can create a QC.

The proof of the reduced memory complexity is linked in section 31 but it is really long winded however, it seems the classical Schnorr lattice reduction problem for factoring integers has a space complexity of O((logN)^(α)/α*loglogN)) which according to the author, since the paper can map SR pair finding (the time consuming piece of Schnorr's algorithm) to a Hamiltonian, we then have a quantum factoring algorithm of the same complexity.

Seems pretty handwavy to me.

Can you quantitatively say that some cellular automata compute framework would give a broad or more accurate output than a typical linear compute framework? I fail to see how embedding some complex computation into a cellular automata framework with over-provisioned resources gives unique compute insight and it almost seems synonymous with some ML auto-scaler or some ML controller that dynamically scales compute when needed.

What specific problems are not tractable via traditional autoscaling methods that cellular automata can compute more efficiently or accurately? I understand you think stochastic type/life type computations are better suited for this, but that would be more of a hunch than verifiable proof.

How exactly is the T2 architecture "indefinitely" scalable? You're adding various computers next to each other, fine. You might also claim that you have some generic cellular automata that in the future would somehow correlate with a dynamically scales according to some computation. This doesn't provide generic compute for arbitrary problems and your limits are still based on the cellular automata running on classical computers. You can claim all you want about dynamically scaling computation that's implemented fundamentally via some cellular automata controller, it doesn't make it true.

I agree, I think we're discounting genius insight as the primary driver of innovation and ground breaking science, and we can't expect genius insight to occur in some predictable time frame or a time frame even within a lifespan.

I think perhaps we've also partially lost the meaning of ground breaking research given the constant news articles on "ground breaking science" and the constant overinflation and exaggeration of one's papers and achievements.

I think that the expectation that "ground-breaking" discoveries in science should follow some linear or predictable timetable is not reasonable. Is the time period between "ground-breaking" discoveries supposed to be every 5 years, every 10 years?

The volume of papers has increased significantly, and publish or perish kinda stinks, but it's not just an issue of funding, but some (many?) researchers publish and exaggerate about the importance and difficulty of their research to receive an "I am smart" badge on social media. Although, despite this increase in volume of crap tier papers, the article seems to think it's not correlated:

"Declines in disruptiveness are also not attributable to changing publication, citation or authorship practices..."

As others have mentioned, the double-split experiment is interesting in that when you leave a quantum system alone and let it travel through the double slit experiment, the interference pattern occurs. If you "force" an entangled system into a particular slit, then you don't have a quantum entangled system by definition; the entanglement comes from the quantum interaction of the system and how we can only describe it via an entangled wave function.

I think in terms of practical use cases, generally for entanglement, it allows for high amounts of encoding since the particular basis used to describe each individual constituent becomes coupled with one another e.g. (|PsiA, PsiB> = (|A1> + |A2> + ... + |An>) * (|B1> + B2> + ... + |Bn>)) allow for a high number of configurations of a problem space to be encoded. I suppose there could be some interesting optical phenomena used for optical experiments/pulsed lasers but you'd probably need to discuss this with an optics expert :-)

Legit, TeamBlind is full of crazies (like myself) but it's a great source of entertainment and ideas. It also gives you a good insight on what's going on in the market, and to see other high achievers also feel the exactly same as the OP; PhDs earning 600k for Google complaining about their work or thinking they need to do a startup, etc...

Great points. Moderation is a very hard job, and good moderators understand they will likely be biased and can admit to it. I think moderation fairness problem is equivalent to the "auditing the auditor" problem; for some given events, how do we ensure that the labels given to the event are accurate and unbiased.

One solution might be for n moderators to evaluate and give the label to the reported violation, and ensure n is odd and larger than 1. However, this is tedious (although that is the tradeoff for fairness) and assumes there's an equivalent number of moderators who lean liberal, conservative, and neutral (in addition to assuming there's no biases created by the culture of the social media platform and management).

Perhaps each report should be given a detailed criteria as to why it was labelled as inappropriate, but this too would be subject to bias, emotional response from both parties, and slow down the moderation process which is likely backed up with many events in the queue, without really any direct benefit to the bottom line of the company although one could view this as a quality issue and lack of QA will ultimately produce an inferior product that is heavily QA'd.

Funny enough, I know some engineers who go to work, non-remote, to escape from their wife and kids for a bit and work becomes an avenue to relax! And having to take care of an aging parent who lives with me, I can understand.

The 49ers stadium in Santa Clara has brought nothing but traffic, zero commercial or housing development. The Warriors' Chase Stadium helped vitalize Dogpatch but I guess one could argue that area was naturally going to be built up given UCSF expanded in that location.

The 49ers bring entertainment but the stadium built at the new location hasn't really brought much to the local community aside from lots of traffic on Sundays. I lived right next to the stadium for several years and there's been next to no commercial development nor housing development. Anyone who goes to the 49ers game has to drive to DTSJ to continue the party. I don't know if it's the result of NIMBYs or the local government, but the stadium has brought nothing to the local community (maybe to the pockets of the mayor and the admins who approved it however).

Low energy could be many factors:

- Low sunlight could cause SAD (https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/seasonal-affe...)

- Depending on how you exercise, if you go very hard at the gym, you can start off with high energy when you start but as you build a routine and ramp up in intensity/volume, you will end up very tired

- Your cortisol levels could be high from working too much/boredom. I think a lot of people might be confusing depression with general boredom/overwork (https://health.clevelandclinic.org/effects-of-working-too-mu...) and often, a solution would be moderate exercise to increase dopamine production or planning going to some big event (I personally really look forward to electronic music festivals/events)

- Over/under weight can cause low energy. What's your diet like?

- Is your sleep optimal? You might have sleep apnea or some sleep conditions that you might want to look into

In general, I found when I was eating healthy, going to the gym moderately, and had an active healthy social life, my energy levels were mostly good compared to when I was working really hard, not really going out, and exercising. It's probably multi-faceted and you'll have to double check your assessment of you being tired as actually physically tired, or unmotivated/bored.

I don't doubt that Worldcoin creators want to solve decentralized identity and give out coins to participants. It's just hard for me to see a path to which it scales or becomes practical for an exchange of goods, unless many governments and businesses start using Worldcoin for identity services.

There also seems to be other blockchains to offer identity management, albeit no additional UBI aspect, so then how does Worldcoin beat out the other blockchains offering the same service? It's not clear to me but I agree that it's good that people are trying.

Okay fine, the image of someone's eyeballs are unique and we take some checksum, store it in Worldcoin block chain, and each individual gets some coins. This particular data is owned by the private key of each individual and can be used as some form of decentralized identity. Ignoring possible privacy concerns, how does this produce any money aside from people buying coins due to hype?

It's not just lab work, I TA'd for physics and students would come to TA discussion sessions to get a more detailed lesson on the material covered that week since often the professor is just repeating the contents of a textbook. Also, many TAs would spend many additional hours in tutoring and office hours, giving individualized attention to students, and this workload adds up.

TAs also grade quizzes, final exams, create questions for problems, etc... The professor often does very little work and leaves it to the TA, at least in my experience as a TA for physics courses. It's a lot more than just maintaining a lab.

Pretty crazy because his engineering decision to lay off a huge chunk of engineering implying the Twitter engineering was easy and trivial was a huge part of him being an incompetent CEO.

He doesn't really know how to code nor architect any software systems, what makes him think he's qualified to lead the software side? It's insane.

I think it's a mix of both clash of ideologies, and attempts to outdoor the other with snarky responses. Throughout history political ideology has had strong opinions from opposing sides, but typical only a subset of people were given an opportunity to voice them. Now, anyone can and a lot of it does seem to be pure snark.

100% agreed. Toxicity of social media comes from the "look at me!" and "I'm implicitly better than you" mentality. Most people have egos, which is fine and necessary, but social media gives free reign to let those with huge egos use their looks or material goods for attention seeking and any criticism is blocked or met with "haters gonna hate.

Seems like Mozilla is just hopping onto the decentralization/Mastodon bandwagon; where was Mozilla when Mastodon was a fledging new company?

https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/official-mozilla-presence-on...

And never we forget that Mozilla talked about integrating moderations into their own browser...