jpt4

I also have the Skullcanyon, as a laptop replacement machine. None of my previous personal computers have had ECC RAM, but none have had more than 16GB either. What is your use case that benefits from error-correction, if you please?

Simulate (with asymptotically perfect fidelity) the simulating substrate - learning what's your underlayer is a different prospect.

This reply takes advantage of the opportunity of a dialectical opponent, represented by your comment, to address abstract issues alluded to by your words of choice. It is not intended to argue or refute your worldview directly.

> is there anything more important to anyone ... [than the life] of another person

Behind the veil of ignorance which equates all persons, things which might reasonably be considered more important include:

-the lives of more than one other person

-severe changes in the quality of life for many people

-significant environmental degradation, and other systemic alterations of sufficient scale

Allowing for the criteria to include the differences between individuals, the most immediate additions to the above list becomes:

-the life of oneself

-the preservation of the lives and quality of life of one's family members

Further, although our current legal system precludes it, the framework of thought exists for very fine grain gradations in the differing values considered inherent in different people, as expressed by e.g. the German weregild system [0]; under such precepts, allocations of attention would be prioritized following the accepted worth of each object of attention.

> maybe I'm simply being too soft

The perspective assuming a position of ignorance is often considered "soft" and idealistic, in contrast to the "hard", realistic, non-egalitarian stance here epitomized by the system of man-price. I propose that this is the common interpretation. However, I counter that the former is only effectively realizable by a juridical system of great strength and resources, before which all men can be operationally equated because the marginal burden any one case places on the faculties of the law is negligible. Therefore, perhaps you voice your position not from reasoning aligned with softness, but rather that aligned with awesome and as-yet-non-extant might.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weregild

> police unions had become more and more explicit in aligning themselves with Trump and the militias.

Perhaps others have different perspectives on this, but my vision of a martial law future bills the police as supportive of the existing regime, from whence they draw their tax-funded salary, not a challenger whose installation would likely interrupt the same.

"Ecuador respects the principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of other states"

A reasonable policy in the abstract, though the enforcement seems rather selective given the previous WikiLeaks divulgences of e.g. Manning's documents, and contradictory with respect to Assange's asylum, which precludes the operation of the internal police affairs of Sweden.

Of course any reasonable implementation of such a principle leaves discretion for the degree of interference allowed in each case, and evidently tilting the election scales is a line too far - but what then does this say about Ecuador's position on "Collateral Murder"? Perhaps the US government should quid pro quo Quito a bit harder given the latter's apparently positive endorsement of certain kinds of internal manipulation.

Ed.

Edit: ED IS THE STANDARD TEXT EDITOR! [0]

[0] https://www.gnu.org/fun/jokes/ed-msg.html

Primary versus secondary property, sovereign and allodial versus infeudinated ownership. Different in autonomous kind due to a difference in degree of autarky.

Reporting for future record: This post was flagged less than ten minutes after being posted, without any comments.

With all due respect, Open Whisper Systems might ought first consider fixing Signal's multiplicate message problem, especially silent (to the sender) group chat spamming.

Thank you, I do recall now the relatively recent "vouch" unflag feature launch.

A question for the moderators: Is flagging an automatic operation, or is mod discretion required for its enactment, as well as its undoing?

If one considers the previous ~200 years of Russian Baltic/Eastern European hegemony to have experienced merely a 25 year interruption, perhaps Russia is feeling revanchist, that dangerous superset of expansionist which fuels the latter with patriotic imperative.

Do the results from Generic Case Complexity [0] bring more of the computational hierarchy into the realm of feasible (generic) verification?

[0] Specifically the generic case decidability of the Halting Problem for one-sided tape Turing Machines? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic-case_complexity#The_ha...

The maintainer, whitequark, has an equally interesting portfolio outside Solvespace: https://lab.whitequark.org

Beyond not wrestling the letter of the language of the letter to Theranos's best but inaccurate presentation, I would suggest Elizabeth Holmes live the next half-decade with a much lower profile. Step away from the medical devices industry, and upper management in general, either to study or work in a different field/within a different authority structure. If she has any aspirations towards family and children, now would be the time to pursue those particular goals. She is visibly intelligent and ambitious, and I would be very interested to see her return after an extended recollection of her prowess, tempered by some character-building not profit motive oriented experiences. Given the evidence thus far, I fear for her further march into a high-time preference mode, and ultimately burn-out.

Not the United States military, to any appreciable extent. It does have to worry about its internal laws though, in which restraint is assumed unless specifically excepted.

In my experience, the TSA has difficulty distinguishing curves from angles. It is perhaps permissible that an X-ray machine lacks the appropriate resolution, but the human eye and brain are clearly capable of determining curved-tipped scissors from sharp-tipped scissors. Not so the federal security officers who beggar that species classification, and must query and ponder whenever they encounter examples of the former among my possessions.

Large cities rather self-consciously (as any NYC comedian will tell you) run on the razor's edge of minimum comfort for the maximum amount of productive people, ruthlessly filtering for those who can withstand the continual mental, physical, and social penalties with vitality to spare.

For typed, convertible files, global revision control, and possibly the access control enhancements you mention (for the other features ignorance begets silence), Urbit [0] may be of interest.

[0] urbit.org

3, 4, and the emotional support aspect of 2 read like you are pining for matrimony.

It is refreshing when only the maps, and not the objects, are under serious contention. I suspect I still might prefer walking a shade closer to the line dividing definitely intra and potentially extra boxed agents, but you are the ones actually in the arena - do keep up the interesting work.

Would you please direct me to an example of MIRI's Red Team efforts that isn't the recent "Malevolent AI" paper [0]? Adherence to the belief that UFAI is a threshold-grade existential risk seems to compel a "define first, delay implementation" strategy, lest any step forward be the irrevocable wrong one.

[0] http://arxiv.org/abs/1605.02817

MIRI is entirely Blue Team - they work to create theoretical [0] safeguards on AI agents yet to be developed. I've long envisioned a counterpart Red Team that does nothing but build AIs that attempt to subvert these safety features, since the rest of the world of non Friendly AI [1] research is only unco-ordinated para-red behavior.

[0] In the sense of "valid under these known precepts", not "speculative".

[1] Non "Friendly AI", not "non-Friendly" AI.

The expressiveness of the tower of universes limits to that of Peano arithmetic, correct? Otherwise, there would exist a universe k that contain theorems that could not be computably proven in universe k+1.

On a separate matter, are there any principled meta-universal rules for incrementing the universe index? That is, if one suspects that one's current universe lacks proving power, is it possible to generate the axioms for a more powerful universe?

The most straightforward answer is not guaranteed to be the most implementable, especially when it relies on co-ordination power. However, various people behave variously, and there exist those for whom "a twenty mile run at night" is entirely within their power [0].

[0] Commentary on the differing preferred escape strategies of Frederick Burnham and Winston Churchill. https://read.atavist.com/american-hippopotamus

> Many news outlets will say "Warning, the following story contains graphic imagery,"

Since blood leads, this is, in my personal estimation, done primarily to increase immediate viewer count, not avoid - and thus retain in the more distant future - discomfiting sensitive current viewers.

Curiously, a stereotypical infant directed speech instance that seems distinctly "oral" [0] is the union of those three options: "coo-chee, goo-chee, [k|g]oo".

[0] Perhaps only idiosyncratically.

I am smiling across my front teeth, so rare is it that I read

> I'm sick to the back teeth

Thank you for keeping this colloquialism in circulation.

Thank you.

From the article:

First, Florida, not California.

Second, the lede:

"Moon Express, based in Cape Canaveral, Fla., announced Wednesday that it had received approval from the Federal Aviation Administration to set a robotic lander on the moon.

That feat would win the Google Lunar X Prize competition for the first private organization to reach the moon and an accompanying $20 million reward."