triclops200

Oop, thanks for the correction!

Glad to have been helpful, thank you for engaging genuinely! Hope you find readings as informative as I did!

See my comment elsewhere this comment section, but, it's not "labor arbitage": it's an imperial system of capitalist power that's enforced via violence. Further, this was understood by China and Deng and the opening up to western markets with a defanged internal capitalist system was a planned move to eventually libereate themselves from westen hegimony; the term used for this was "hide your strength, bide your time."

The negative effects of AI interacting with our society can be understood as almost entirely a function of capitalism. Look up "the real subsumption of labor." These effects on the environment are a direct result of fundamentatl flaws in the capitalist system to regulate externalities.

"Sure, powers like the US and others still exact colonial-like force over smaller and weaker countries, for economic gain,"

that's definitionally colonilism under imperialism.

"but if the US would retreat from that colonial position tomorrow, the workers in those countries would not suddenly get higher wages, they'd just get more oppression from their own local robber barons, as it happened in every colonized country after the colonizers left."

not true, when colonizers leave of their "own volition", it's usually with a puppet government left behind called "friendly" that's essentially a proxy for colonial extraction. Nations that kick out the foreign influence under libertaory action often are sanctioned or invaded to try and topple them and revert to depedance on western intervention, but, when they succeed, rights and success often are much increased for the people in them, see "Human Rights in the USSR" by albert syzmenski, who uses only western sources for the book to steelman his position.

The western dependence happens through layers of coordinated and planned proxy vasselization. See the books "Unequal exchange" by Arghiri Emmanuel and "superimperilaism" by michael hudson for more details and scientific treatments of the question. "Inventing Reality" by Micheal Parenti might be another good read for you!

"But if you wanna grow the scope, we can say that we're all serfs of usury by the international banking system which runs on getting us addicted to debt which we and future generations are forced to pay off without being asked if we agree with it,"

Glad that one of the other sibling comments looked this quote up so I didn't have to. Fully "growing the scope:"

> For capitalism to generate greater profits than the home market can yield, the merging of banks and industrial cartels produces finance capitalism, and the exportation and investment of capital to countries with undeveloped and underdeveloped economies. In turn, that financial behaviour divides the world among monopolist business companies. In colonizing undeveloped countries, business and government will engage in geopolitical conflict over the exploitation of labour of most of the population of the world.

> Therefore, imperialism is the highest (advanced) stage of capitalism, requiring monopolies to exploit labour and natural resources, and the exportation of finance capital, rather than manufactured goods, to sustain colonialism, which is an integral function of imperialism.

> Moreover, in the capitalist homeland, the super-profits yielded by the colonial exploitation of a people and their economy permit businessmen to bribe native politicians, labour leaders and the labour aristocracy (upper stratum of the working class) to politically thwart worker revolt (labour strike) and placate the working class.

-- "Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism"

"Then that's not colonialism, it's just serfdom. Colonialism implies a foreign nation, but most countries workers are poor due to their own politicians and business leaders squeezing them for their own interest."

This distinction collapses under the scientific understandings of imperialism and colonialism, linked above in more detail.

"Originally, I was thinking about blocking users from closing their overgrown tabs until they slash all plants, but I thought it would be too annoying... " I would ask that you please add this as an option :), might actually use it for that feature alone because I do accidentally close old tabs by accident without noticing that was meaning to keep open.

Interesting. Glad to see this done, though, wonder how often large models run into these numerical bugs? They note in the paper that it's uncommon, but, I wonder if it'd affect anything still (though, I doubt it. If it was run into in practice, they would have probably shown an improvement on a larger problem than the small functions they were learning on):

> Though the extreme margins and near-zero student–teacher gaps probed by our experiments are uncommon in standard large-scale training, our fixed functions are easy drop-in replacements that can be implemented without meaningful slowdown, and may prove useful whenever models make high-confidence predictions or distill from close teachers.

No, but I have the linnstrument and have programmed my akai launchpad as a midi controlled isomorphic layout before, which are both grid layouts in a very similar configuration (though, the linnstrument allows for bends/slides/expressive-playing). I also have a synthstrom deluge which is also essentially the same midi controller as the one you mentioned.

I love the linnstrument, but, different vibe. More like a 8-string stringed-instrument than a keyboard.

The launchpad/deluge, which are more direct comparisons, are fine, but, I miss the range of a larger instrument.

Further, the amount of keys does not affect the ease of control as the layout of the Lumatone is very regular, so, it could be 100x as long and just as easy to control outside of having to jog between the ends of a hypothetical 30 ft long keyboard, lol.

Not the OP, but, I'm also hyperphantasic, which is the name for that. For me, personally, I usually think in something akin to visuals, but, with all the other qualia mixed in as relevant, not just visuals.

Quantity is not necessarily a problem: it feels a lot like the same tradeoff as if you need to picture a lot of apples in an image of fixed resolution, you can make them smaller/less detailed just by, loosely, "allocating fewer pixels per apple", rather than needing the same detail for each that you'd need if you're trying to zoom in depth into one apple.

However, if I have a situation where I have to picture a lot of very detailed things of irreducible complexity (the details matter) that need to be placed in a specific configuration (the ordering matters), then it gets harder. Statistics was so intuitive for me that I would read the equations as visual images in my head because it was throwing out the individual details and dealing with population mechanics as individual objects of study. However, combinatorics was initially very hard for me to learn because it was dealing with very large numbers of hierarchies of orders as well as the specifics of their interrelations, so building intuitive understandings of why the theorems were correct was very difficult.

I have learned to lean on a very internally barebones representation of language/symbolic structures when needing to reason about certain complex topics that require it, but, even then, often when I'm conscious of it, it's almost like I'm visualizing the letters or forming the words as sound in my head. When I'm forming sentences to actually speak or write, it feels like I've got a concept that I've turned into a "rendering" that I'm trying to communicate via language substructures. To do so, I'll break it down into component parts and just start describing the substructures as if I'm perceiving it and describing it live in small parts. It feels like the learned skill required for speaking a language for me is learning how to decompose and reorder these objects into chunks that are expressible within the vocabulary and grammar of the target language and finding the correct words&patterns that represent and order these chunks most efficiently for effective communication. Almost feels like a SAT problem or a language diffusive process (and likely is, to some degree, related to those processes or similar under the hood), but, it actually qualitatively feels that way to me, consciously/experientially. Language feels almost bolted onto my experience rather than the primary mode of thought, even if I can think in it if needed.

If you read the article that this post is referencing, that's actually ruled out as a viable possibility. UBI does not fix the issue and is shown to not actually work long term. We need to systemically fix the issue at its root by replacing the system wholesale is essentially the conclusion (or put increasingly higher taxes on automation, but, that's still a reactive fix and would likely be gamed under current incentives)

This phenomena was also described/characterized in prior Hegelian literature as part of the law of quantitative into qualitative change, though, not formulated mathematically at the time. Interestingly enough, and In the context of how cross discipline this discovery has historically been, iirc, Lenin played around with mathematically characterizing the phenomenon, though, I am not aware of the extent to which he did. Very universal phenomenon for sure.

Read TFA. They got the price from the menu they were comparing to in 2014.

Honestly, not cool.

Mine "roasted" me by making fun of the fact I never finished a PhD, despite that being due to medical and other life circumstances that were well outside my control, including, but not limited to, some issues related to the fact I was a woman trying to get into academia who experienced the kinds of behaviors from people in the department which are not really suitable for polite discussion.

Additionally, it roasted me for building a project to "avoid the outdoors," which is another incredibly demeaning thing to say to someone who explicitly created that project because she was too medically unwell to be able to go outside as much as she wished and wanted to bring a bit of the outdoors inside. Very lame, definitely missed the mark.

The elisp and common lisp notes were on point, though, and did get a chuckle out of me.