YeezyMode

It likely helps to take in the cultural moment or context around the statements or the nature of the statements you're making. It's fine to state a fact but it's also helpful to make it clear whether you are saying "it is what it is " or "I wish things were different" or "I am doing X, Y, and Z to try and help and I recommend others do so". Jokes are an exception and I think misunderstandings are fine there. But it's unreasonable to think that on the Internet, people will "check to see if you are serious".

Would you say that this in itself is due to how incomplete human reasoning is in the first place? That as a result, our ideas of logic and what perfect logic looks like are bound to fail? Or are you saying that the purest mathematical representation of logic cannot scale to a point where they can model and predict real world relationships successfully?

Assuming the scenario where ISPs end up blocking access to the archive, the fact that this is happening alongside rapid advances in LLMs is pretty insane. Comparisons with historical snapshots of the web is probably one of the best ways to combat disinformation and misinformation generated using AIs. There are of course other risks and dangers that people have talked about re: restricted access to knowledge and precedents for future publications, but this one in particular seems very dangerous in a timely manner - almost like a setup for very clear and obvious disasters surrounding propaganda, memes, and social chaos.

This is a possibility that shouldn't be dismissed. Trees use mycorrhizal networks to communicate and have been around for a very long time on this planet. They model the environment and use either a set of micro-decisions or a set of larger, slower moves that are made across longer timescales than humanity is used to. You can argue whether they possess sentience or not, but when discussing models, decisions, and consequences - trees seem to act with plenty of coordination and understanding and self-interest.

I've seen kids respond the same way and I totally did not fully see the disparity in reactions until you pointed it out. It definitely looks like people who have spent years priming themselves for a singularity, intelligence, or consciousness at every corner are far more susceptible to equating the recent advances as parallels to conscious experience of humans. I read a highly upvoted post on the Bing subreddit titled "Sorry, You Don't Actually Know the Pain is Fake" that argued for Sydney possibly being just like a brain, and experiencing conscious pain. It was disturbing to see the leaps the OP made and the commenters who agreed as well, though I do agree that we should avoid purposefully being toxic to a chatbot nonetheless, but due to the consequences to our own spirit and mind.

I've rarely come across photography online that completely transports me. Great work on the Baikal blog!

This is beautiful.

Straight from Wikipedia: Kinopio, which is a mixture of the word for mushroom (“kinoko”) and the Japanese version of Pinocchio (“pinokio”). Those blend to be something along the lines of “A Real Mushroom Boy.”

It seems so unlikely to me that large swaths of people who act this way can make it to a place in any industry where they're surrounded by more resourceful peers. How does this even happen? I just want to make sure that I'm not creating a view out of reading exaggerated anecdotes, and that this actually reflects reality.

The following sentence clearly mentions what kind of lumping takes place; "All Africans" / "All Asians" etc.

You may have already, but you'd enjoy reading 'Conscious Mind Resonant Brain' by Stephen Grossberg.

Does this argument explain why I can't think of a single country that has put forth a concerted effort to discourage cross border capital flows? I don't think so. If I'm wrong please point out a case study. I think the fact that globalism ends up being a net positive for nations long-term is the reason they prefer to stick to it as a system. I'm not well-versed in economics as a whole, but it seems like PPP is one of the metrics that can somewhat approximate how well individuals in a nation are able to exercise economic power. And it looks like globalism does help increase that if the goods your country produces are uniquely positioned in some way (ie uniquely cheap, uniquely durable etc.). I remember many people predicting that the luxury-good level pricing of the iPhone meant that it would never take off in "non-developed" countries but clearly in 2021, that's far from the truth. I think what people want is access to high-quality and reliable goods/services, rather than globalism or nationalism as a system.

FWIW, I like localism the most due to the psychological/cultural/scaling effects that it produces and hopefully, there's a minimally harmful way to get there without getting stuck in a nationalist rut.