I love how memes (in the Dawkinsian sense) work. Lots of people have enjoyed this, but I can imagine this being quoted as the original is lost to the sands of time.
Young people everywhere thinking that Aquaman was someone who just bought failing assets from everyone.
I’m not sure this is fair. I don’t think this is in lieu of such a conversation, but about some ideas on how to pitch the conversation. If you don’t have any friends in similar circumstances, it’s worth finding out what other people do.
That said, the range of suggestions here is so broad that I’m not sure it’s going to help!
There was a period in my life when I had to remind people frequently that NoSQL stood for ‘not only SQL’.
This is a fairly good summary of my argument against why we are in a simulation.
I’m certain (indeed more certain than I likely should be, which may be meta-meta memory?!) that what you say that the end is the case. There’s almost certainly a bias towards error correction over direct recall. Certainly my experience is of testing wrong answers in my head before alighting on the right one.
That implies a set up more like an adversarial neural network (I’m not saying this is actually how it is, just trying to draw an analogy from something I understand), as opposed to a function in code. But that seems like a bit of a waste, but also means that two (or more) distinct processes could be working on the same task?
That’s very helpful thank you. I read the abstract of the paper, I think it might take me a couple of goes to really grok it. I think it’s testing why are more likely to correct a wrong answer given on a test (in a subsequent test), if they are enthusiastically told it’s right the first time. This is compared to if they are told that they might be wrong!
Given it’s the first time I’ve heard of this, I’m finding even the premise a challenge! ‘Hypercorrection’ apparently, for anyone not going to the paper.
What I’ve read of the article, meta memory seems to be more about our ability to judge how well we know something, rather than evaluate if our recall is correct.
I say ‘rather’… The concepts are obviously (or maybe not obviously!) related, but that sounds like assigning a score to the information we possess. While my original question was around evaluating knowledge as incorrect after recall.
That’s why the engine analogy doesn’t quite work for me. It’s not one answer, it’s two! So if it is an engine, it’s one that drives the car both forwards and backwards initially, and then switches off the one it doesn’t need.
I’m definitely going to read more into these concepts though. Thanks again for the links!
There’s another issue too. In perfect conditions, self-driving cars are a lot safer, but they aren’t 100% safe. So when an incident occurs it’s newsworthy. (In the same way that we hear about plane crashes anywhere in the world, but won’t necessarily hear about someone getting run over in the next city).
My hypothesis is that adoption would be throttled in even near perfect conditions. Just because we’ve internalised the risks of driving, but haven’t for the risks of being driven by a computer.
All that, and you may have left out the most damaging of all… Trump will likely pull the US out of Copenhagen, leaving no chance of limiting temps below 2C let alone getting anywhere near 1.5C. The excess deaths from this will likely dwarf COVID.
I’ve only watched the first of these, but having done so, I’m not sure I want to bother with the second. The guy in the first video repeated the (likely true) claim that WFH impacts commercial real estate value and then dunked on a couple of articles about return to work policies. But the question was, why does that sway Amazon’s thinking?
Still my favourite game of all time, so it didn’t really spring to mind for ‘underrated’ games. Pleasing to see it mentioned all the same.
My concern with this line of argument is that it bundles consequences from a system of government up with the consequences of trade embargoes and other hostile actions from capitalist economies. That doesn’t make the actions of the dictators in those countries justifiable in any way, but might have precipitated conditions that made them more likely.
How would communist nations have fared if the US had taken a ‘live and let live’ approach to them? The approach during the cold war was that they couldn’t be allowed to succeed. That led to the sort of standards of living where dictatorship tends to thrive. Note this isn’t unique to communist countries. Look at the Republican party in the US, now that Neoliberalism is failing.
The point seems to have gone quite a long way over your head. The person above is advocating for a system where transit/active travel is the easy option. Not one where you have to up your commute by 500% to do the right thing.
It’s not, “just use transit”, it’s “please make it easier to do so”.
I was certain this link would already be here! https://www.theverge.com/2024/4/2/24117976/best-printer-2024-home-use-office-use-labels-school-homework
Does nobody else find the framing of this article a little weird? I thought the argument for boosting the economy, was because it correlated well with people’s well being. (Not that I personally but that, but I understand the line of thought). Now instead we’re suggesting that human outcomes are important because it boosts an arbitrary measure? I feel like the cart is now dragging the horse along the ground.
I have it on android! It’s been a trusty travel game for me. I do find the upgrade pathways a little narrow though. Maybe I haven’t quite got the knack for it yet, but I find that I don’t have enough agency over if a run is successful. That is to say, I lose and too often can’t point to something I could have done differently.
I’ve spent an outrageous percentage of this year playing the poker solitaire/deck builder/roguelike that is Balatro.
I didn’t like roguelikes until dicey dungeons came along, and since then my favourite games have been that, slay the spire, Hades (haven’t played 2 yet) and now this.
If you like deck builders, I highly recommend it. A very smart twist on the solitaire genre.
This isn’t a comment in support of the actions described, but a comment about unintended consequences…
If you reclassify putting stickers on a car as domestic terrorism, you’re somewhat removing the disincentive for some in doing an actual terrorism.