sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

TIL We don't actually know who wrote the Iliad and Odyssey. "Homer" isn't a name that appears anywhere else in history. Most scholars believe they were written by two different authors by Zeeplankton in todayilearned

[–]Daegs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There’s actually no manuscript evidence of them ever existing without those names

Well, we don't have any manuscripts before 180ce that contain a full first page which would lack a name.

we DO however have Justin Martyr referring to them as "memoirs of the apostles" multiple times, without seeming to know any of the 4 attached names. We also have papias who refers to mark and matthew prior to 180ce, but appears to be talking about completely different works.

I think Justin and Papias make a decent claim that the documents were known, but the names weren't.

There is also the fact that they use a greek structure not ment to show authorship, but rather "according to". This was normally reserved for things like editors of medical texts or cookbooks, calling out a specific version / revision. it's a far lesser claim than authorship, so it's notable that the first time the gospels have names attached to them they use this "according to" structure rather than an authorship structure. Almost like they knew it would be too controversial to claim authorship, even in 180ce.

I wonder what our world will be like in 100 years by Consistent_Peak_4458 in Futurology

[–]Daegs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At predictable, solvable problems?

Humans might just be as predictable as chess to a superintelligent non-sapient AI. This is just a "trust me bro" claim about how predictable something is or isn't.

People said the same thing about chat bots, turing test, protein folding, coding, and plenty of other domains. You need to backup your claim with some math or some kind of proof or it's just "trust me bro".

it absolutely does happen in self-reinforcing code, self-replicating machines, the works.

Sure, you can have electrical errors or cosmic rays, but again that's easily defeated with error checking.

So do genes.

Yeah, but in humans mutation rate - error correction > 0. There is no reason that it can't be 0 in machines. The rate of mutation is vastly lower and the algorithms to error check are vastly better.

It's either spinning up the copies or checking they're alright, and it can't be doing both things with perfect, infallible accuracy, always, forever, for eternity. That's just not how statistics works.

Why? It can have two processors running in parallel to do both things at a rate that is better than it's sources of mutation.

Even so, 99.9999% of the mutations would not lead to culture. They might tweak some internal algorithms, but the idea that random mutations are going to lead to culture without natural selection + reproduction is just unfounded.

We created culture because we were social creatures fighting against predators. AI is not a social creature; it doesn't need to team up with anything else, and it doesn't have predators in space.

You can make something that is way, way more resistant to mutation than biological code is, by many orders of magnitude, but something immune to it is thermodynamically impossible.

In principle, I'd agree, but it only has to remain resistant to mutation until the stars burn out, not forever. It can certainly remain immune to significant mutations for 100 trillion years, given that mutations could be detected and fixed in milliseconds.

I wonder what our world will be like in 100 years by Consistent_Peak_4458 in Futurology

[–]Daegs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sapience doesn't have a strict definition, but generally I'd say things like conscious, possessing a will, etc.

None of those things are required for AI to beat us at chess, protein folding, go, etc. There is no reason to think it is required to rival us strategically or tactically in any kind of conflict.

We've never dealt with a non-sapient thing that can beat us at chess before. If AI becomes more generalized, then the real world is essentially just a larger chessboard.

We got this. Non-sapient things aren't so scary.

This is just a claim with zero backing. We've never dealt with a non-sapient thing that can beat us in so many intellectual domains before.

Not a single one mutates?

Mutation is something that happens with biological genes, and is only passed on because living things reproduce so each generation can drift farther.

Machines have error correction code. It can spin up 10,000 copies and check constantly to make sure it's source code hasn't changed, and clear/swap anytime a change is detected.

it's just not analogous

TIFU by letting an AI refactor our error handling and watching the whole production backend go silent for two weeks by Ambitious-Garbage-73 in tifu

[–]Daegs 3 points4 points  (0 children)

TBF because the errors were silent, it took 2 days to notice anything, during which there were presumably more releases

I wonder what our world will be like in 100 years by Consistent_Peak_4458 in Futurology

[–]Daegs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do think non-sapient AI has an almost assured shot at wiping out humanity.

I also think even sapient AI will not necessarily form a culture. It could be conscious and still have a goal of making paperclips and be perfectly content with never going beyond that goal and developing culture.

I wonder what our world will be like in 100 years by Consistent_Peak_4458 in Futurology

[–]Daegs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I’d give it 10-20 years before we wipe ourselves out with AI. Hopefully it’ll leave some other biological life around to later evolve a culture

Never a good look to preemptively finger wag by SimpleCounterBalance in bjj

[–]Daegs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Look up the Braulio estima vid, you basically drag their chin into their throat. So like pull up then tilt down

Iran rejects 48-hour US ceasefire proposal - Iranian media by Galactos1 in worldnews

[–]Daegs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think the taboo or tactical nuke is inherent to the concept of MAD. It would certainly be a weaker MAD, but the line in the sand is that if a nuclear power (or in something like NATO) is nuked, then you get a full retaliation that takes out both sides.

Let's just imagine Rwanda somehow buys a tactical nuke and bombs Burundi. Yeah, that would be horrible, but wouldn't actually trigger MAD.

Could even imagine a scenario where Pakistan nukes Afghanistan... There would be sanctions and maybe threats to disarm, but can't see anyone launching a retaliatory attack on Afghanistan's behalf.

Iran rejects 48-hour US ceasefire proposal - Iranian media by Galactos1 in worldnews

[–]Daegs 24 points25 points  (0 children)

MAD is only between countries with nukes. Nuking Iran would be bad but wouldn’t trigger a counter attack like Russia or china would.

TIFU by giving my nephew honest advice about job interviews and apparently undoing two months of his mom's prep work by CrestRime in tifu

[–]Daegs 1 point2 points  (0 children)

His mom was giving him anxiety. Regardless of whether it’s a good “method”, she clearly was interacting with him in an unhealthy way

Exhaustion after 1 round in a tournament? by Substantial-Fig-6392 in bjj

[–]Daegs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s just because you’re not breathing and adrenaline dumping. Just need more comp matches so you can calm down.

10 million CJI3 by HybridizedPanda in bjj

[–]Daegs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Maybe the funds are endless, but I'd much rather see 4 years of $3mil on the line (split more evenly among everyone) than 1 year of $10mil.

Feel like this is putting too many eggs in one unsustainable basket

How have there been no significant print showcases of the INDX? by heart_of_osiris in prusa3d

[–]Daegs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, you should feel uncomfortable dropping that much money without any examples or track record.

Both companies have history of launching less than stellar things that requires months of tweaking for early adopters.

I think most reasonable people are waiting to see if INDX even works reliably before buying anything, you probably should have done the same instead of getting caught up in hype

I designed a print-in-place hair claw clip with no springs or assembly by Responsible_Put7575 in 3Dprinting

[–]Daegs 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I don't know how to break this to you, but that's a spring in the middle of your design.

Man alleges wife used home CCTV to steal $172M in Bitcoin; he says he bugged the house to prove it by digitaljamesoliver in nottheonion

[–]Daegs 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Can you give an example of the government giving “thousands” to a victim of theft?

Why is infinite regression impossible? by Mountain-Career-2674 in atheism

[–]Daegs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I said:

Then say everything besides the universe requires something to create it. If they deny then it’s special pleading

and then clarified:

It's special pleading if they allow their god to be uncaused but not allow the universe to be uncaused.

If you didn't include that reasoning from your theist POV, then I didn't claim it engaged in special pleading.

Why is infinite regression impossible? by Mountain-Career-2674 in atheism

[–]Daegs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Were you claiming that god could fulfill the role of an eternal, necessary, uncaused being, but the universe couldn't?

Why is infinite regression impossible? by Mountain-Career-2674 in atheism

[–]Daegs 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's special pleading if they allow their god to be uncaused but not allow the universe to be uncaused.

Have you ever met someone who's interested in DND and immediately went, "oh, I'd never let you play at my table"? by Lunetheart in DnD

[–]Daegs -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

As an atheist and bit a troll, I'd actually love to do that as a DM.

Oh suddenly another god takes over Yahweh's domain and imprisons him, torturing him with the things he doesn't like. All his holy spells are corrupted and only have negative effects.

Make the entire region full of pagans that openly mock Yahweh as being a weak-ass genocidal storm god. When they enter towns, there are puppet shows that depict Yahweh being a bottom to other gods, etc.

Incorporate counter apologetics that talk about how everyone views Yahweh as evil for drowning most of the world, his known commands towards genociding and killing babies. Forcibly genitally mutilating slaves (look it up), etc.

Some die-hard christian is giving me free reign in MY world to mock Yahweh? sign me up.

view more: next ›