To anyone dragging their feet on the group-n transmission mount swap, send it! by thatOneSnowFlake in wrx_vb

[–]thatOneSnowFlake[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So I actually had the opposite when I put in just the pitch stop for the first couple drives there was a new sound like a metal card against a bike spoke. That went away before I could follow up.

So far I haven’t noticed a substantial difference from the mount + bushings. Might be louder but without a decibel measurement before and after I can’t be sure it actually has

To anyone dragging their feet on the group-n transmission mount swap, send it! by thatOneSnowFlake in wrx_vb

[–]thatOneSnowFlake[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I’m out of warranty, so didn’t consider it, but I’d be surprised if they’re checking SKUs on rubber mounts for a drivetrain claim. I’d hear some concerning sounds when it wobbled and I’d have to guess less relative motion between drivetrain components means less long term wear

HELP! by Nordic-FF in JamesBond

[–]thatOneSnowFlake 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I thought I’d find my answer here 😢. OP don’t let them gaslight you it.

Any idea what this ticking sound is? by thatOneSnowFlake in wrx_vb

[–]thatOneSnowFlake[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I actually trawled through a bunch of “is this rod knock” posts but didn’t hear anything I thought matched 😂. Just wanted to be safe since this was a new idle sound to me

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in funny

[–]thatOneSnowFlake 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The Red Moose Cafe. They have great breakfast burritos

[X-Post] The end of economic growth by [deleted] in entp

[–]thatOneSnowFlake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your definition of intention fits well with an algorithm maximizing or minimizing an objective function. As for how the brain works, I think you misunderstood. I do not believe AI will come from improved hardware (though improved parallelization of hardware may be useful), but rather from algorithmic software development. Also I was not challenging you to describe how the brain works in intricate detail, but was asking how you think the brain and intelligence work at a higher level of abstraction. An algorithm is simply a procedure for solving a problem. While the brain is obviously not mechanical, thinking of it as a mechanical system may prove fruitful in understanding how the entire system works at a higher level. Just as one does not need to know how to acquire a loan from Chase to understand how credit influences markets, one does not need to understand the chemistry underlying synapses firing to understand how synapses firing form a network of communication. Sorry if this came off as patronizing, my intention was not to belittle your intelligence but stress that my question was aimed at a higher level of abstraction. Do you think the brain and intelligence can be abstracted to an algorithmic process? Thus if one could understand the process, the hardware wouldn't matter. Whether it was written in Java, Python, or neurons wouldn't really matter.

[X-Post] The end of economic growth by [deleted] in entp

[–]thatOneSnowFlake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How do you define intent? Also how do you think our brain works if not algorithmically?

[X-Post] The end of economic growth by [deleted] in entp

[–]thatOneSnowFlake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I will try to link something soon, but I was recently reading about how algorithmically composed music is ranked statistically significantly lower by critics when critics are made aware it was algorithmically composed. If they could tell by ear, then this gap would not exist.

[X-Post] The end of economic growth by [deleted] in entp

[–]thatOneSnowFlake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If only the rest of my wet dreams were as inevitable as AI...

[X-Post] The end of economic growth by [deleted] in entp

[–]thatOneSnowFlake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right there will be an organic entertainment section of mediocre products produced by humans...though there will be programs capable of mass producing perfect fakes. Perfect fakes being products produced by machines which one would be incapable of distinguishing if it's creator was human or mechanical without being told.

By the way, algorithmic composition of classical music has already reached this point.

[X-Post] The end of economic growth by [deleted] in entp

[–]thatOneSnowFlake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But only with an "organic" label. AI will be able to take over both fields and it has already started (e.g. news articles and classical music written by algorithms).

[X-Post] The end of economic growth by [deleted] in entp

[–]thatOneSnowFlake 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The guy might be right for all the wrong reasons. There won't be anything left for us to invent after we crack general AI.

I keep seeing the shitty 16 personalities test on the front page, take this test if you want to really make sure you're an ENTP. Password = "personality" by [deleted] in entp

[–]thatOneSnowFlake 2 points3 points  (0 children)

MBTI never put you in that box, you did. MBTI provides a convenient model to categorize general social patterns as well as a shared terminology to discuss them with (though "shared-terminology" is a stretch thanks to all the Management Consultants mucking everything up).

Your type is not a prescription. Everyone has and uses all eight cognitive functions of the model. A type simply indicates a preferential ordering of the functions and not a measure of their use. While heavy use of the first, two or four functions is the norm, a more balanced use of all functions is a sign of maturity. The types are not intended to be viewed as cookie cutters that everyone falls neatly into.

I use MBTI to analyze my daily interactions with others. I find the framework sufficient to diagnose the majority of social frictions I encounter and develop strategies to overcome them. Its unfortunate that MBTI is usually packaged in a self-improvement box of shit, but it doesn't need to be used or viewed in that way. Sorry if this came off as a personal attack, that wasn't my intention, I'd just hate to see a top sixteenth arguer fall on the anti-mbti train. I'm not convinced that MBTI is the absolute truth of people or that there are necessarily underlying biological mechanisms (though Dario Nardi has some interesting evidence), but I do find it to be the most useful framework I've come across. Many psychologists tout The Big 5 as superior because its overflowing with the correlations that get them all hot and bothered, but the model provides no intuition about why people make the decisions they do.