And you need not defend anything from an an elitist aristocrat like me. We don't live in the same reality—and that is okay. Because there are multiple realities. Unless you wish to object to this notion and assert, like an imperialist, that there is only one reality and that I have to "necessarily conform" to it. Otherwise, you may subscribe to your reality of God given rights, goods, and societies while hyper-reality cosmos-nauts traverse their higher and incomprehensible planes of existences like Lovecraftian antagonists.
Is the education of the average person worth it, or anything significant? Considering the average person does not have any significant production capability, a power-law probability distribution average. Not everyone can make things and contribute to society like Elon Musk or else everyone would be named Elon Musk. It's best to just classify only exceptional individuals as more important in large scale public policy. Idealistic socialists would disagree with me but productive reality and politics are not disjoint.
How fast can a single board computer such as the Raspberry Pi compute the solution to a linear programming problem (i.e., a mathematical optimization problem of the form Ax < b) that has, literally, trillions of constraints? Or can it even be done at all what with the large pool of constraints to navigate through? And how is such a prospect and execution compared to the computations done in the middle of the twentieth century which used weaker computers?
Indeed, since truth does not exist, language and communication is impossible. But the truth predicate for propositions isn't necessary, as truth doesn't exist to legitimately create a legitimate need for any sort of necessity. So, instead of searching for the truth predicate, and as grammar and syntax, those subjective and arbitrary creators of languages and communications, are the ultimate sources of meaning rather than any inherent meaning itself, why not look for something else? Or establish something else? Like untruth and uncertainty?
Thermodynamics and the quantum most certainly would not exist if you did not bring them up. You are now the master of existence. I dub thee Molecule Man.
How do you know that there is a communication going on and in what absolute sense does it occur, without resorting to any certain sense as certainty always comes up short, never converging to actual truth and is, therefore, not suitable for matters of truth. Any meaning given to any instance of language depends on subjective based grammars that give life to words, indeed conforming to a regime of, ultimately synthesized, grammars which don't exist without a subject of self-governing origination. Every measure of consistency requires a necessary foundation, with the foundation always being some imagined standard based on certainty, that commonly found tool of the mind that never really tells you anything. The emprical, material, and even biology and its evolutionary theories? Knowledge of their objects always depends on interpretation and interpretation is always not objective but instead subjective. And for there to be a commitment, there must be a personality. But personality is, logically, dependent on a regime of truth and it is codified by the user of this regime—a mess of endless self-reference, as truth is wont to do. Really, at this rate, I'll eventually converge to the truth that there is no truth, that real truth is not, instead of being is. Indeed, I'm going one truth further.
Interesting. But I'm skeptical about the existence of an absolute truth. Because, ultimately, what would be the essence of what it is, truth? And why would it exist? What source would be the source of this truth, ultimately? And how would we know, especially as truth implies untruth and therefore the possibly of cognitive error?
> A subset of the authors point is the "truth collapse". It's increasingly difficult to differentiate truth from falsehood. Also increasingly difficult to differentiate between truth and 'almost' truth.
It's kinda hard for there to be, in actuality and in an objective sense, a destruction of truth when, really, truth never existed in the first place except as a perspective-based pragmatic tool and even a self-actualized Other-being. Really, when one person claims that truth is becoming destroyed or something, such occurence is actually an instance of a contest of truths, all equally valid, in essence, with the one that has the most ambition able to enjoy the fruit of victory. That's why "fake news" is often touted: a transgressive action on its antithesis and opponent that is the "false."
It is ultimately, in a certain sense, a mathematical optimization problem to determine the optimal configuration of the entire infrastucture of additional power sources. Perhaps like finding the optimal location position set of cell phone towers, perhaps using k-means clustering. Furthermore, additional issues must be resolved like legal regulations compliance—the decision maker or engineering agent has preferences or desires to satisfy.
I intended for my phrase “confident realist materialism founded on a certain anthropocentric presumption of Cartesian dualism,” in all its entirety, to refer to the object of the critique. I apologize if my carelessness caused you to interpret the second half of the phrase (the part after the word “materialism”) as a mischaracterized signifier of you, the subject or cause of the critique. Regardless, I thank you for providing an organization of your advanced philosophy and the fundamental mechanics of it.
An inspiring critique of and response to confident realist materialism founded on a certain anthropocentric presumption of Cartesian dualism. It exemplified skill—its own powerful confidence—and experience, deserving great commendation. The education born from witnessing such activity has a high aesthetic value to me.
Contrary to the dominant narrative of this Hacker News post’s comment thread, I find this mathematical modeling exercise to be rather informative and inspiring. Life sustaining. It can be considered practice that keeps the vital muscles active.
Very inspiring work and achievement. It is perhaps the equivalent of the application of quantum mechanics during the middle to late twentieth century. As such, perhaps "decentralized general computing" is more plausible than I thought.
What possible relationships exist between this phenomenon of successful people being middle-aged and not young and the common meme that asserts that life is short?
This is the original poster. I shared this source code repository here on Hacker News in an altruistic and strategic attempt to encourage both the advanced development of nascent software development individuals and the creation of new and novel video games for the 2020s.
Google Inc. is cutting jobs? Is this actually a move by automation’s machinic desire to displace human laborers or human capital? Pieter Levels, an expert in startups, said that “Netflix wants to have less employees, but each one now paid higher. For example, they'll pay one million dollars per year for one engineer instead of paying $300,000 per year for three engineers each.” This is actually making me anxious to the point where I’m trying to pick a skill to appease a machinic desire’s new and progressive, if a little anti-anthropocentric, labor production power and capital market demands so that I can satisfy a certain power-law probability distribution function’s optimization.
I synthesized a very small amount of programming ability and skill from reading randomly chosen and scattered source files of an open source Quake clone’s source code (Digital Paintball 2), even though its comprehension and understanding it was beyond my capabilities at the time, especially at such a young and immature age. That tiny amount was negligible, but it still functions today as a segment of my present and current programming knowledge infrastructure. So you can safely conclude that the activity of reading “seemingly” insignificant programming source code files is a future knowledge, capability, and understanding’s becoming-vital infrastructure. For what power does not have a base or foundation to plant its feet upon?
> Is this what they call gatekeeping in a different world?
Ah! Your name is greenly colored like the fresh and newly grass that dews in the start of the morning—as though your name appeared but hours ago! Ye be a strange traveller. I cautiously ask thee, It be true that I keep to the gates? But how can that be! when the gateway to true knowledge is open to all? Does some sort of strife exist? And my way be the way of non-action, a way of harmony. Whatever is, I allow. So you may be whatever you choose, you strange dear traveller! I welcome your force of argumentation.
> I think the op was asking because you had their interest and they wanted to know directions they could go in.
> Your post seems to assume people know of the different directions they could study
Ah, forgive me as I am blind to my appearance, especially blind to my appearance’s appearance to the sight or eyes of others. I too do not know what directions there may be in the pursuit of truth, as a master or sage must not claim to know. Only thus then does the master know true knowledge. ...For doth not truth be vast in size?—oh! but I do not know of truth’s size!
Ah, a curious intellect has approached! Know that every “What kind?” is the desire for a common ground of understanding. So the student must first ask themself which understanding would they like to pursue. What be your choice? A choice that only your heart’s love can ultimately know.
Skills to acquire in 2020, ye Hacker News reader? A wee bit of abstract mathematics knowledge, so that you can better think in abstract terms when solving problems. The hardest of problems require the usage of and familiarity with advanced abstractions. Abstract mathematics knowledge provides that great—and profound!—capability.
> Leftists can't conceptualize this problem [of perpetual rising unemployment due to technology] because of their egalitarian worldview, and rightists either talk about bootstraps or might not even care, seeing it as a sort of justified Darwinism.
This. So much this. And it would take a Julius Cesar for everyone to see the truth… With physical force. But this hypothetical ruler that saves the day would be an unseen actor, its ideology nonexistent as it corresponds directly with truth as it functions; in contrast to any flawed human character that reasons from humanity, that is, from emotion, prejudice, and mistaken bias. Not seeking glory and fame but instead, letting go of lustful passions, giving what must be given and withholding what must be stored or withheld—achieving balance with the Force. So this implies that the brave Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker was actually Julius Cesar.
> Facebook is just transitioning to becoming the digital equivalent of an oil company. They make a product that billions consume, but that many people think is doing damage to the environment (even though many of those critics still consume the product).
I like that analogy or narrative. The aesthetic value of the analogy is appealing to me.
In the end—oh so tragic!—such finely dressed intellectual literature is naught but sensational marketing for the selling of a capitalism induced labor product (the author is selling a book) and the fallacious persuasion of a perceived and wishful reality that requires you to have “faith” and “certainty” rather than any scientific, consistent, and methodical evidence. Oh, but you write really well, intellectual soul! So cheer up! What does it matter?