sixo

It's just a terrible point. You couldn't make a weaker case against data centers if you tried.

sort of. It does a lot less than Roam, etc., which is good because Roam is complicated. In my experience the simple model of obsidian is just right, and the implementation is excellent.

Some pertinent fragments of wisdom gleaned from other places:

Somewhere I encountered a quote like "the finest art is a life well-lived". This threw me, because, apparently, I had been thinking of art as something different in kind from life, and unrelated to the normal work or act of living. Seen in terms of this quote, art becomes once again of-a-kind with life, and may be seen as only a part of living well, instrumental to living well, or perhaps just as practice for living well.

Something similar seems to be happening with "thinking" and "intelligence". Somehow these things had become ends-in-themselves, separate from the regular act of living. We might wrap them in a similar quote to place them in relation to life, along the lines of "thinking well is for living well", or perhaps "the highest good of the intellect is to be well-fit to the problems of living well".

I am reminded also of a line which stuck with me from Augustine's Confessions, approximately: "The mind is not the supreme good"—as opposed to the body and perhaps the "spirit". Somehow the world I was born into had collectively come to think of the mind as the supreme good, and intelligence as the greatest virtue. But this is, in some way, in contradiction the basic fact of existence and mortality: no amount of cleverness can circumvent death, and all the glory attainable by feats of the intellect are only futile vanities compared to the privilege of being alive itself.

That kind of thing.

Nobody has a moat so long as employees can move between companies

This really is a place where the guns-don't-kill-people argument applies, even moreso than guns themselves. The U.S. government massacred school children in Iran. Why does it matter how they targetted them?

It is in the interest of everybody-except-OpenAI and Anthropic that those companies have capable competitors; better still for the competitors to share their advances.

They don't have to be our friends to act in our interest.

They just need to be educated not to touch the wires. As it happens they figured it out pretty quick

I imagine this is the referee's call; a ref ought to know better than to abort the game because the losing team is throwing a tactical tantrum.

I think this is definitely part of the problem. The senses are designed to all be involved in navigating a single, mostly-permanent world. Proprioception is supposed to orient within this permanent space. Whereas my proprioception has "nothing to do" in video games, and all my senses are only experiencing the world outside the game, which I am giving none of my attention.

Subjectively, it gets much worse when I play a lot of of video games, and I am rapidly losing the ability to develop facility at new games. Of course this could just be said to be aging, or some other malady of the mind, but it feels distinctly related to the gaming in particular.

I have a feeling gaming is quite harmful for spatial skills in the long run, because you learn many different maps (often transient ones in rng-ed games), rather than one fixed one. I would not be surprised if an epidemic of early mental decline begins to show in gamers in coming decades. I'm 36 now and feel like my spatial reasoning is declining in a strange severe way.

Psychological state is key, and I think you're understating it.

The human mind is always passively working on problems. We are not necessarily aware of how much working memory is "tied up" on background computations, but when it's a lot, we will feel a natural aversion to new learning, it will be exhausting, and we will lack for curiosity. This is fine, working as intended.

When in this state, what one usually needs to do is a different part of the learning process: not absorbing new information or abstractions, but making sense of what one already knows, working out contradictions, assembling larger-scale theories--synthesis, basically. "Learning" is only one part of the arc of "thinking".

Usually this is best done by writing, and usually comes easiest when trying to convince someone else or what we believe. If you can't find the energy to learn, try writing instead.

That's a nice argument, though it doesn't hold relativistically

Kinetic energy is, strangely, quite a bit like a least squares cost function in an optimization problem. The "dt"s in "dx/dt" hardly matter; it basically represents "dx^2" between the current state and the next.