Note that there are plenty of things that count as “working hours” when white-collar workers do them but not when blue-collar workers do them.
A1987dM
Karma: 15,135
reality has a surprising amount of detail and those details really matter
Yep, the first thing I thought after reading “this isn’t actually possible to achieve in the real world” was “Yes it is! See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_hypnosis, or that time I played in a concert while blackout drunk and I can only actually remember playing half of the set list.” The second thing I thought was “But did I actually have no qualia, or do I just not remember them?” The third thing I thought was “Is there any way I could possibly tell, even in principle? If there isn’t, doesn’t that mean that there’s no actual difference between qualia and the formation of memories of qualia?”
Am I the only one who, upon reading the title, wondered “do they mean arguments that conscious AIs would be better than unconscious AIs, or do they mean arguments that existing AIs are conscious?”
Would you apply that to other examples of loss leaders too? When I buy a Ryanair ticket with no priority boarding, a randomly assigned seat and no luggage and don’t buy anything on the plane, should I feel guilty because if everybody paid as little as me the flight wouldn’t be net profitable for Ryanair? If not, what’s the difference?
I would instead choose a relatively light ‘this is not allowed’ where in practice we mostly look the other way
That is very seldom a good idea, for reasons detailed in https://siderea.dreamwidth.org/1209794.html (if euthanasia is outlawed, only outlaws will euthanize their patients) https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2007/04/formalist-manifesto-originally-posted/ (any circumstance where the actual norms don’t match the ostensible norms can lead to uncertainty and/or disagreements on what exactly the former are, and you don’t want that)
Multiplying all this together gets you to a 1 in 80 million chance of all this stuff happening under the null hypothesis, which is highly significant.
Not until you work out the chance of all this stuff happening under alternate hypotheses, and the prior probabilities of alternate hypotheses, and the prior probability of the null hypothesis.
(I asked random.org for 10 random bytes and I got 02 c8 c2 30 60 b3 2e 93 a6 e9 . The chance of this happening under the null hypothesis is 1 in 1.2×10^24
“Being a physicist is a drag, but it still beats working” (Aurelio Grillo as quoted by Giorgio Parisi, translation from Italian mine)
I’m almost sure Sumerian had words for “artificial” and for “intelligence”.
”Paracetamol” on the other hand… :-)
I’m almost sure I saw a Wikipedia article about this back in the mid 2000s with a 2D version of your plot, but I can’t find anything relevant in either https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies#Statistical_fallacies or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_paradoxes#Statistics … did I just dream of it?
(it’s hard to get curtains that block direct sunlight that well).
[These things](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stellladen_Roll_fcm.jpg) are pretty much ubiquitous in Italy in buildings since circa 1970s, and [these ones](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Villa_Olmi_K.jpg) (which are somewhat less effective but still way better than a curtain) in earlier buildings.
I dunno… IME, when someone not capable of steelmanning him reads e.g. David Icke, what usually happens is that they just think he must be crazy or something and dismiss him out of hand, not that they start believing in literal reptilian humanoids.
The ToC makes it looks like “blood donations” and “exercise” are among “things that will eventually kill you”...
(Not sure whether $50/day allows you to do this in San Francisco, but:) Live within walking/cycling distance of work, grocery stores, nightlife, museums, etc. so you won’t have to drive a car every day.
Yeah, I often refuse giving people money for something I don’t care about even if the impact of that on my wealth would be negligible just in order to not reward them.
98.: I don’t think the link points where you wanted it to point
My guess would be that:
the direct biological harms of alcohol are roughly linear, i.e. one drink a week is about 1⁄7 as harmful as seven drinks a week, which in turn is about 1⁄7 as harmful as forty-nine drinks a week;
the psychologically mediated benefits of alcohol (through reduced anxiety, improved socialization, etc.) quickly rise up to a few drinks a day, then plateau (and even reverse at very high doses)
when you subtract something like atan(x) from a straight line you may or may not get a minimum at x slightly greater than zero, depending on the slopes involved
(which I think is still not quite enough to make it obvious he’s less dangerous than complete strangers on her way from the metro station back home unless she’s in a third-world country, but still)
Yes (though OTOH conversely there are also things that many Europeans struggle to afford but Americans take for granted, e.g. air conditioning)