jamesrcole

I don't think color is that different. E.g. older computers had limited color palettes, like 16 color EGA.

does building those machines require us to fully understand quantum mechanics?

> exactly correct in physics, and quantum mechanics is one of them, alongside Relativity

what about gravity? If we don't know the correct account of that, how can we know those are exactly correct?

> There is a complex relationship between truth and *good* communication. [...] There are many many cases where lies are *easier to communicate* than the truth.

You're literally conflating good communication with easy communication.

Not one bit of that justifies actively misleading people. Which is what that headline does.

> Lets assume what you say is true about Musk

There's no need to assume. If you are actually educated on the subject, you know it is the case. You don't because you're ignorant about it. Which would be fine, if you weren't pontificating about things you know nothing anything about.

> current day Twitter addicted, drug addicted, brain damaged Musk

this is like conspiracy-theory level stuff.

I see you didn’t pay attention to what I did and did not say in my original comment. I’ve read a biography of him and When The Heavens Went On Sale, which covers SpaceX [Edit: I'd remembered the book incorrectly. I have read that book, but it doesn't cover SpaceX. The books that I'd read that cover SpaceX are The Space Barons: Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and The Quest To Colonize The Cosmos, by Christian Davenport, and Liftoff: Elon Musk and the Desperate Early Days That Launched SpaceX, by Eric Berger]. What you’re claiming about him is completely wrong and completely ignorant. I know you haven’t actually read anything substantial about him, because if you had you’d be fully aware of how stupid the claims you are making are.

You literally don’t know what you’re talking about. If you’d read any biography of him you’d know how utterly wrong your claims are.

After the endings of Thimbleweed Park and Return To Monkey Island, I lost a lot of respect for Ron Gilbert.

> "Having the courage to go on when nobody believes in you"

If you're doing something that isn't like how people are used to things being done, is novel, or is contra to common beliefs, there's a good chance that nobody will believe in you. And in such situations, their lack of belief is not a reliable indicator of whether what you're doing is valid or correct. Most people's negative responses in such cases are emotional responses, not rational ones.

In such situations, "Being honest with themselves about whether what they are doing is actually working or not" and "Having the courage to go on when nobody believes in you" are not opposites.

> As we advance it becomes more difficult to advance. You obviously make most advancements around the things that are easiest to improve. Then all the easy things are done.

This isn't some foregone conclusion. It completely depends on the rate at which the intelligence and abilities of the AI increases. If that rate was high enough, then the harder and harder problems would become easier and easier for it.

I would expect a model's result each time to be of a similar quality to the other times. There's something wrong if it does a way better or worse job, at the same problem, sometimes. It's possible, but I haven't heard anyone saying that they do.

it's unfortunate that they live an extra 6 months???

Though you'd want to make sure there's no essential information that only this employee knows, because that action might terminate that employee's desire to cooperate with the company.