American cars having their brake lights and turn signals be the same light is stupid and dangerous.
That we’d all be better off if we accepted our own fallibility. That we are not perfect little robots, and as a result more tolerance and forgiveness in the world is necessary.
stronger products need less advertising, so an over-advertised product is likely inferior.
That documentation is supposed to explain how a thing works to people who don’t know how it works. I know, sounds extremely obvious, but you’d be surprised how much documentation out there is written in a way, expecting you to already know what it’s talking about. No. I do not. It is the documentation’s job to explain ME what IT is talking about…
Where on the doll did the man page touch you?
The man page was empty.
When changing lanes or turning you are supposed to use the turning signal before doing the manouver. The turning signal is supposed to warn other drivers that you are going to do something. It doesn’t make any sense to use the turning signal when already mid-turning or while already changing lanes. Many drivers don’t seem to know that.
You have been permanently banned from c/BMW.
I don’t think BMW have a turn signal
Perpetual growth in a finite system is impossible, and anything that relies on perpetual growth to function is doomed to eventually fail.
For instance: social services that rely on perpetual population growth (especially youth population; e.g. Japan/South Korea), companies that rely on perpetual increase in users (most publicly-owned companies; e g. basically every social media company ATM), industries that rely on perpetual advancements in technology (e.g. industrialized agriculture, which constantly needs new ways to fight self-induced problems like soil depletion and erosion), housing as wealth generation (to be a wealth generator it has to outpace inflation, but at a certain point no one will be able to afford to purchase houses at their inflated prices no matter how over-leveraged they get; e.g. Canada). [Note that these are merely examples where these issues are currently coming to a head; they are by no means special cases, they’re just in a more advanced state of “finding out.”]
In other words, a lot of the modern world, in both public and private sectors, is built around a series of ponzi schemes.
I wish I could upvote more.
You can by creating more accounts.
But you’re assuming the type of growth will never change.
- population growth is not sustainable and we’re past that point, but knowledge growth is
- resources growth is not sustainable and we’re past that point for many resources, but economies can grow independently of resources
They literally said:
Perpetual growth in a finite system is impossible
I don’t see how your comment applies to that.
Knowlegde growth may be sustainable, but it is also impossible to grow forever. (Supposing knowlegde is finite, which is, as far as I see it, the case as long as we make the definition of knowledge depend on characteristics like repition-free and new. For example, you could learn the number pi to even longer lenghts forever, but doing that is not necessarily something new to know as it’s just a manifestation of a repition which was already discovered.)
I’m intrigued how you would explain that economies could grow independently of resources. From my perspective, it looks a lot like each and every form of economy relies somehow on some form of resource or resources. As resources are finite, economies can’t grow forever.
There are already trends showing economic growth disconnected from both resources and energy. Welcome to the service economy
Service needs workforce performing the service. Workforce are usually human resources. Thereby, limited again. Or did I get it wrong?
We already have many cases where a very small number of humans can manage automated services for millions. It’s extremely scalable
While you could argue the electronics and power are also a resource dependency, it again scales extremely well
That reality is not defined by our wishes, but by observable, verifiable facts.
Sadly, a large amount of people cannot accept this.
Reality is what you can’t turn away from.
Quantum mechanics would like a word…
We should live more instead of wasting time at work but we can’t because we’re forced to get income to live
Exactly. I’ve heard a “counter-argument” to this saying “I need to keep myself busy, I need to work.” Why not be able to optionally work more?
8% of 50 is 50% of 8
This is the third time this year that I have come across this. I am pissed that it was never taught in school… and that apparently I keep forgetting it every time.
A way to remember it is to remember why that’s the case
8% of 50 = (0.01 • 8) • 50 = 8 • (0.01 • 50) = 50% of 8
It all just boils down to the fact that multiplication is associative and commutative (aka u can multiply numbers in any order you want)
Ask me if you have any questions (im a math tutor i love teaching math) 😊
Also, if you have any tricks for teaching percentages, ratios and basic statistics PLEASE SHARE. My partner has a new job and while he shines at the field work aspect, he has trouble with the mathier parts. He’s had godawful terrible teachers his whole life. I’ve tried coaching him in math but my methods don’t click with him. We also don’t have the time to wade through dozens of YouTube videos hoping to hit the holy grail…
Yeah in my experience watching youtube videos passively is a waste of time. Time is better spent struggling with math practice problems and guiding him theough it when he’s stuck :-)
Thank you for taking the time to write it out! Funnily enough I’m not too bad at math (I tapped out at around linear algebra level) but I was taught in a very rigid way. Useful concepts like commutativity were just… read out loud to kids to be remembered as a Law Of Nature, instead of allowing kids to play with numbers and develop our numbers intuition. So while I have a decent theoretical knowledge, I’m terrible at applying what I know to real life. If that makes any sense?
All rich people became rich because people like you and me are paying more for services and things than they’re truly worth, which means we pretty much never get our money’s worth even when we feel like we do.
There are no good rich people.
Most rich people became rich because their ancestors got paid a surplus.
Hours spent working is not the same as productivity.
Twice as many people assigned to a project does not double productivity either.
I could go on…
LLMs are not general AI. They are not intelligent. They aren’t sentient. They don’t even really understand what they’re spitting out. They can’t even reliably do the 1 thing computers are typically very good at (computational math) because they are just putting sequences of nonsense (to them) characters together in the most likely order based on their training model.
When LLMs feel sentient or intelligent, that’s your brain playing a trick on you. We’re hard-wired to look for patterns and group things together based on those patterns. LLMs are human-speech prediction engines, so it’s tempting and natural to group them with the thing they’re emulating.
Humans are not descended from apes. They have the same ancestors.
Why is that so hard to understand?
Humans are apes. It’s monkeys we’re not descended from.
Humans are not descended from contemporary apes rather the apes that were around millions of years ago.
Also, if we attain the not-insignificant-anymore possibility of going extinct in the next couple hundred years (like the dinosaurs from famine complicated by drastic climate change, or from too many microplastics in the brain, or from nuclear escalation, which we haven’t entirely ruled out) we will have only survived ~250,000 years compared to Homo-Erectus which survived over 2,000,000. But we will get the self-extermination achievement.
That other than a niche we specialize in, we’re pretty fucking dumb at everything else.
