730 karma · joined January 27, 2013
6 months is nothing and doesn't say anything. But AI is just the frothing on top of the debt bubble, and all the cheap money that is still circulating around the economy. What I'm personally doing is taking on an asset allocation that would weather a potential downfall.
That doesn't make sense, as the drivers are obviously not operating at a loss.
I think other motors by bafang have similar setups.
What you described here has nothing to do with ADHD. You described a situation, a problem solving strategy and an outcome. That says nothing about the brain involved, or its functioning.
ADHD is a particular state of a nervous system, one of over stimulation/over excitation in one end and under stimulation in another. You can see it on an EEG, excess beta waves (among other things). You can see it as a neurotransmitter inbalance, neuroinhibitors not working properly.
But besides, the functioning of a brain and the environment it finds itself in are two interested things. But of course there is some influence between them.
It's probably been a long time since he was trying to steer the project to his standard of perfection, he gave up on that. Like he grew apart from it, life got in the way, and steering Linux is now more of a job than anything else.
What I'm saying is, 2004's Linus would have never allowed Rust into the kernel.
Would you expect an AI to suffer from ADHD? PTSD? Almost certainly not. Because most of these conditions result from an interactions of brains of different evolutionary ages.
Unless of course you're trying to replicate a mammal nervous system its entirety. But then your goal is not singularity and you're definitely not optimizing for intelligence.
This of course doesn't take anything away from the design, as clearly Apple has had a hefty lead against other smartphone SoC designers in the smartphone space for years.
Wouldn't it be awesome if Apple's CPU/IC design segment became a separate company and sold these CPUs and maybe SoC by themselves?
I think that would make a big dent into AMD/Intel market shares. Since Apple's part/die should be quite a bit smaller than most of the x86 dies, the fab costs should also be smaller and so should the final price.
As for pollution, no-one can deny that, but the rocket stove bunch claim much reduced emissions compared to even modern wood stoves (which I personally find hard to believe). But still, billions of people are still using wood to heat their homes; that's not going to change soon. Reusing that to produce electricity as a byproduct is something that some people call 100% efficient.
I also side with this view, namely that this is something that would be better placed in the userspace rather than the kernel, which really doesn't need more complexity for things that add so little value (negative value to some).
The most common reason people are hesitant about rushing to build an AGI is the issue of AI safety. (at least that's the general consensus in the community).
The work needed to implement an HTTP server is growing and growing and growing. There was some speculation a few days ago on why this is happening, and why big companies are benefiting from this. I don't think there's any conscious conspiracy anywhere, just a lot of people try to make a name for themselves. (There was a discussion on this a few days ago here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23833362)
But I just hate this growing complexity everywhere. HTTP can and should be much simpler than it's becoming.
Besides, it's not a difficult target to achieve. I don't think it would cost much more than a few tens of millions of dollars to start and operate some solar and wind power stations of sufficient capacity to offset all of their consumption. It should be pocket change for Apple's budget.
The wood itself matters a lot too. Black locust wood has an enzyme in its grain that makes it extremely rot resistant. I've heard of black locust poles used as fence poles in the ground lasting for decades.
You may think that these conditions are not strongly related to procrastination, I can argue against that.
The best way would be to study the neuroscience of human motivation. There's a specific brain circuit involved. But from another perspective, we do what we do to fulfill various needs, mostly security and belonging. That can result in things as complex as status games.
Things are a lot more complex than that, if you consider the evolutionary history of the brain stem, limbic system and the cortex, each newer system is able to override the older one, resulting in completely different behaviour.
But it should still be much better than these thermoelectric generators.
BSDs do a bit better here, but they are still behind on several metrics. Maybe this will be the main motivation for the next successful kernel? The fact the Linux simply got too big and complex?
As long as you're getting your point across, everything is fine. It will naturally improve in time with practice, although I can't see any problem with your current way of writing.
Also, the way this is implemented in the brain is probably far from the most efficient way.
Is it likely that the Chinese are giving false data / simply not testing as thoroughly anymore?
You conclusion about people understanding math is unfounded, maybe OP doesn't have the data, maybe that's simply not the concern of the question. (and even you are making a hidden argument for getting infected now, whilst hospital beds are still available, rather than later).
Again, if written in good faith, there are no stupid questions, and ad-hominems like yours have no place on HN.