mouse_

The validity of someone's prior statements weigh heavily on the perceived validity of their future statements, no matter who they are. Wouldn't you agree? I'm neither attacking nor criticizing this guy, simply making factual statements about where his ideas are coming from.

This entire, beautiful blog post scales wrong on my phone because of this one line of code near the bottom doesn't get wrapped or get its own overflow box: -device virtio-net-device,netdev=usernet -netdev user,id=usernet,hostfwd=tcp::10000-:22

heyo

Try wasm port? Getting someone to install your app is a huge barrier.

America today also uses mass violence to force people to do things

Heads up, this guy doesn't believe in global warming and regularly criticizes "wokeism" and critical race theory on his Twitter

P-zombies are one of those inactionable inconsequential things people like lesswrong enjoy, because you can talk about it at great length (indefinitely, even) while sounding smart and not necessarily saying anything useful to the rest of us.

The problem with AI is not that it "steals our souls" or whatever you're trying to say (though I must say I do enjoy a bit of spooky sentiment near Halloween!) - it's that it kills mental model diversity. If everyone solved problems the practical and socially accepted way, the Earth would still be flat and hygiene would still primarily consist of covering up bad smells.

The hard problems we face are hard because our model is wrong about them.

But they won't get anywhere, as long as they're beholden to the DNC. See: Bernie

...Has that ever not been the case?

This will be perfect for Nintendo 3DS!

I'd love to see 3DS-style lenticular 3D display with the power of modern Apple hardware + FaceID hardware eye tracking. I bet they'd be able to do it seamlessly.

This should have been the end of it.

> The current NSFW anti-feature definition is listed here: Anti-Features | F-Droid - Free and Open Source Android App Repository and copied below for reference:

> This Anti-Feature is applied to an app that contains content that the user may not want to be publicized or visible everywhere. The marked app may contain nudity, profanity, slurs, violence, intense sexuality, political incorrectness, or other potentially disturbing subject matter. This is especially relevant in environments like workplaces, schools, religious and family settings. The name comes from the Internet term “Not safe for work”.

> The key words here are the user. Apps should only be assigned this anti-feature if the app contains content that the user may not want publicized or visible elsewhere. Most, if not all users of Bible apps would indeed want the content of the apps to be publicized and visible elsewhere, so this anti-feature should not apply to Bible apps according to this definition.

Don't name it that

You can do it.

It will be easy once you start.

Remember the 2021 Texas power crisis? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Texas_power_crisis

In such a situation (pretty much guaranteed to happen again, things don't seem to be improving), who do you think will be afforded the power - homes, or data centers?

It probably costs more

Would you buy a hammer that can't ever hurt your thumb? What implications would that have? Would that be a good hammer?

Bad opinion time that I hope will maybe at least be thought provoking: I would hope a malicious app I willingly installed will be able to behave maliciously. Our security bureaucracy is going to grow exponentially and people are still going to be stealing people's shit, because people need to be able to access their shit and people are dumb.

Not if you don't have permission to install your own OS...

Didn't Google recently kill AOSP and stop providing board support packages for their phones?

Rainbow parentheses blew my mind. Why isn't every editor already doing this?

Sample size of 59 also seems worse than useless; I'm no researcher so maybe there's something I'm missing here but, doesn't seem very good.

Junk science?

no, we've just been hallucinating the internet this whole time

When the system loses its need for humans, humans may lose their need for the system.

These people are not scientists. LessWrong is a cult.

Rationalism is more interested in making its ideas sound correct than it is in having correct ideas. They are very convincing but they have no accreditation.

Don't trust these LessWrong people, or waste your time with their "thought experiments".

native Linux apps also fail when it gets "tricky", so this isn't really that great of a benchmark, is it?

It doesn't.

Don't forget, Firefox didn't succeed because Firefox was good, it succeeded because IE was bad. People don't like having to choose between Google Chrome and Google Firefox.

the problem is greed.

It's not the numbers that freak me out, it's what they do to each other...

We will learn nothing

They are not shutting down his channel