1,680 karma · joined August 11, 2011
Looking at tears and the neurological development from genetics through adulthood would be a great way to understand what makes us human.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2871162/#!po=29...
Our brains forget over time because energy is limited and new connections take energy from older memories. So you could introduce a global set energy variable that is the ultimate denominator.
Lastly, have you considered connecting your agents in a one to one public channel where a person interacts with an agent that asks the person about "meaning of objects" and collects opinions from people to create it's own opinion?
Sourcing material involved cold calling hemp farms and nutraceutical formulators and obtaining certificate of analysis for their ingredients then sending them off to a third party lab to run through an Hplc to confirm the results. The lab I used is called steep hill labs. Hope this helps.
I really appreciate your feedback. Going forward I will be sure to include more useful details.
You must rethink how you think about math fundamentally. This video and paper are like poetry - short but demanding. Watch this video and read the paper. Really think about it in your own way, don't try to force your mind into an unnatural construction.
I'm cautious about arguments that rely on a pessimistic expectation that progress will reverse because it's just never continued in the past. If the argument identified some fundamental reasons why progress will slow instead of drawing historical correlations then it would have merit. Then again if we knew those principles then we could correct our society and avoid disaster. Because this argument is flawed and human knowledge and understanding is the only thing that solves human problems, the validity of the argument is lost.
But I wonder if this fear of busts is holding back innovation. Society is helpless to progress at a faster rate because God forbid there is another bust and people lose jobs and hope about the future. I think companies are waiting with cash in hand to buy up the good deals in an expecting bust. But I would prefer to have the cash used for risky ventures and I accept the bust outcome.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/who-are-...
Increasing minimum wage would effectively increase the 77% number also.
Edit: Clarifying that this is for non-engineering roles.
And according to PG, http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html
So who is this?