0xBA5ED

You actually changed what I said then declared it nonsense. I said abuse, not use.

You're saying that spending time in jail is roughly equivalent to being a victim of attempted murder.

Which specific cities are you referring to that have better outcomes and which ones have worse outcomes?

Not a great solution, honestly. Long term drug abuse is almost never a victimless habit. I'm tempted to say never.

Maybe it is. I guess I was offering my perspective on dividing "real" things from the rest of it and got on a tangent there.

They seem to be getting quite comfortable altering the terms of use without notifying users.

To function. You must assume many things on a daily basis to function and survive because we are limited.

I'd argue we must go with these assumptions out of necessity rather than convenience. I don't have any broad strokes to offer on western thought, however.

Well if you can't concede that anything is real, that sort of makes you crazy doesn't it? A tree is real. But the concept of a tree and the word "tree" and all the ideas you have about the tree and what tree means, is that real? No, because it doesn't change the nature of the tree. When you cease to exist, the tree will still be there. Can you be absolutely 100% sure of that? Also no. But if you believe that other people are conscious individuals like you are and that some of them die and the tree keeps going, you can concede that it is probably true that the tree exists separate from your idea of it.

"It defines a separation between computation and experience" Does it? Or does it separate two forms of computation (or two forms of experience)? Isn't it just saying a GPU can't be a brain and a brain can't be a GPU? That the entirety of a thing's experience can't be replicated on a different substrate, only simulated. The substrate does fundamentally dictate the ultimate experience (or lack thereof) of the thing that computes within it.

So the question is a word problem. The first and last sentences are present tense, the rest is past tense so it's all red herring. The answer really should be 17. BUT if you do the math, 8-12 is actually right. I was finding that Sonnet 4.6 was having a lot of trouble with 1/3 of 4 dogs and 14 sheep and it kept thinking it was 4-5 sheep, 0-6 sheep, or fractional sheep, rather than 2-6 like it should be. Although, it's very interesting to see that it gets it right today but it didn't yesterday. I had shortened it to "My friend had 4 oranges and 14 apples and gave me 1/3 of her fruit. How many apples did she give me? The answer will be a range of possible values." to remove the red herring and it consistently got it wrong yesterday. Very strange.

However, it's also strange to me that it said the dogs were a red herring instead of just answering 2-6 sheep came from the neighbor since that would be the answer.