Just want to say that I always see you post on ad-tech related stuff and your comments belong to the infinitesimal fraction of ad-tech stuff on this site that is informed and not just the result of pure speculation.
Thank you, I appreciate the note. It's based on 12 years and 4 adtech companies worth of experience in the industry, and now trying to change it from the inside.
Haha, right. That comment had literally zero information value. Obviously playing Tony Hawk Pro Skater 2 is nothing like ollying your skateboard let alone any of the other tricks.
Thinly veiled attempt to use online comment forum as a personal blog.
>Obviously playing Tony Hawk Pro Skater 2 is nothing like ollying your skateboard let alone any of the other tricks.
Simulator racing is pretty different from Tony Hawk Pro Skater 2. There's so much shit that you can buy to get you closer to the real deal. Not really so much the case with Tony Hawk Pro Skater 2.
Their bread and butter is search ads, my dude. They don't need telemetry for that. They have search keywords. Almost all of their revenue comes from there and the margin there is huge.
What source suggests Google’s AdWords ads distributed across the entire web (all the AdWords sites that aren’t SERPs) don’t leverage telemetry and don’t drive meaningful revenue?
Hey I've noticed this too. It's like I'm mentally somewhere else. Very odd. Fortunately, when I drive long distances I have other people in the car. And when I drive short distances, I can just stop wherever and change things.
Honestly, on 101 and 280 I see drivers texting all the time and they're driving right in the lane, no problems at all except being slow to react to what happens in front of them (which makes it obvious they're on the phone). I don't know how they do it. Even glancing down at my phone instead of the center console loses so much state.
My friends will come over for 4 hours on a Sunday. I will spend no more than 10 minutes when they're here figuring out controllers. I will spend no more than 15 minutes at any point ahead of time to keep things working.
When they come over, the thing we want to spend most of our time doing is 2 v 2 FIFA. If I spend 30 mins doing anything here, we're losing precious time. If I spend 60 mins debugging, I'm just not going to do it. I'll even take a zero probability of fixing if it means a lower probability of failure of any sort (even recoverable).
That's just bureaucracy in the West. I have contacts in the East who got me Lariago-DS. Super cheap to manufacture, super compact, easy to ship. In fact, it's in plentiful supply. Just not in the West because you have a customs wall.
Drop the wall and you'll have your drugs in days. If you have 'backorders' for your Lupus patients, then you've already failed at something trivial to solve.
Also, in some ideal sense, since we attain consciousness as pure minds untainted by experience, tabula rasa, all that follows is the result of sense information on the network. The concept of individuality is weak. Two pure minds, fully rational and capable of honest communication, can be different by having different sense information, but if they are able to communicate with each other they should, in time, be identical. i.e. once I have given you everything I know completely and you have given me everything you know completely, we are not distinct, you and I are the same. A full mind meld.
We can't do this for all sorts of reasons, but two AGIs truly meeting may, which means that there is a sort of greyness to this true meeting of AGIs: by meeting they achieve unity. All AGIs behaving in this manner then become the same purely by meeting. Interesting.
This makes total sense, because of the assumption of common priors.
Drop that assumption, and fully rational people can indeed agree to disagree. This is a large part of why rational people can look at the same evidence, and come to different conclusions.
> This makes total sense, because of the assumption of common priors.
That's the Wiki article, yes. But scarejunba is going past that, to something more fundamental.
If you have "pure minds untainted by experience, tabula rasa", then you remove the issue of priors. No longer is there any matrix of prejudices that have to agree. You start with observations about the world and logic, and nothing else, and everyone ends up in agreement.
(To an extent you might bootstrap with priors, but over time you'd use observations and logic to replace them, especially when they disagree with someone else you're debating.)
This seems unworkable because it ignores the role instincts have in living things, which are prior beliefs about the world put immediately into action.
For example, an infant has an instinct to breathe right after birth. Is that a belief or an action? It’s both—a strategy to survive in the world encoded in genes attached to an implicit belief. An infant that tries to breathe two minutes later would suffer hypoxia and brain damage, while one that tries sooner will choke.
There is no pure tabula rasa untainted by priors, as soon as you acknowledge minds are embedded in bodies shaped by millions of years of evolution and steeped in survival tactics, and what are tactics except a set of useful priors about good actions?
Also, I believe this requires full mutual trust between the two parties, and perfect communication.
Any breaks in trust, or breakdowns in communication can disrupt the process of mind melding. And it seems to me that trust and failure of communication are features of boundaries between individuals.
Tbh looks like you guys have chosen the third path: neither build the website nor ladle the soup but complain about which of the two things people are doing.
The way it was done in the past is by being ridiculously stronger than the other participant. So you let your Pakistani or Iraqi counterpart make a big show to appear strong to their people and you do nothing because you still have them under your thumb. Unfortunately, China is now one of America’s peers so it’s necessary to establish the level playing field.
