letlambda

I've never heard of a company paying non-salary employees during a plant shutdown. (In the US, things may be different in Europe for all I know)

Isn't the assumption always that accessing a web page programmatically is allowed unless specifically asked not to in robots.txt?

They aren't, we can easily extend the concept by using it as metaphor.

It's a metaphor, metaphors aren't literally physical work implements.

>I suspect that metaphors are the tools of cargo cults while analogies are the tools used by those that actually understand a system in order to convey it to those that do not.

Are the metaphors actual tools, or more like metaphorical tools?

They're also the world leaders in automobile safety-defects.

If you have a probability vector, you would typically take the max, not model the action on the probability distribution.

e.g. If an image (from the forward camera) returns the probability vector: {"stop_sign": .9, "green_light": .1} You stop the car 10/10 times.

Check your orbital velocity at the surface. It's not 0. The direction you head does matter.

I haven't read the paper, but I think:

>undermine the ability of democracies to sustain truthful public debates.

Is coded language for exactly what you're talking about, in the same way that dictators is coded language for geopolitical enemies.

How is your concern different than what they are calling political security (~1/3 of the paper)?

>Political security. The use of AI to automate tasks involved in surveillance (e.g. analysing mass-collected data), persuasion (e.g. creating targeted propaganda), and deception (e.g. manipulating videos) may expand threats associated with privacy invasion and social manipulation. We also expect novel attacks that take advantage of an improved capacity to analyse human behaviors, moods, and beliefs on the basis of available data. These concerns are most significant in the context of authoritarian states, but may also undermine the ability of democracies to sustain truthful public debates.

I think the major difference is this notation has the count of loose wires corresponding to dimension, and Penrose notation has the count of loose wires corresponding to tensor valence.

Here, a diagram with 1L and 2R wires corresponds to a 2d-vector, in Penrose's notation it would correspond to a (1,2) tensor that takes kd-vectors to kXk matrices.

But... they certainly have a similar feel. I wonder if you could build up the Penrose notation out of this.