I wonder if we could get this guy to work if defeating misogynists online could earn him CoD points or something.

“Dad said mom was a b**** c*** w****? Shit, I’m about to hit prestige.”

I took an entire week off for Rebirth, and the whole time was like “Whee! :D”

Oh hell yeah. The perfect system for Yamaoka’s industrial scrape music.

Let me know how it goes. I’ve been real excited to see people experience this for the first time, haha.

Yeah, that’s a tough one.

I’d say “well, don’t,” but that’s pretty obviously useless. :p

I think I can say this much, though: Silent Hill, being so metaphorical, it’s kind of built like a big puzzle? It’s okay to “not get it” while you’re playing. Most of the stuff I know I’m pretty sure I picked up from fan wikis later on.

So, easier said than done, but: try not to think so much, haha.

The remake is also a little better about explaining its own plot, I think just by being a little more obvious. So, by the end, some things might click into place a little more.

And yeah, the sound design, (minor early game spoiler) have you noticed that >!the radio!< >!is a positional sound?!<

!Normally, you hear it kind of left and behind you. My instinct that the sound is supposed to be telling me where to look was so strong that I kept turning away from enemies I knew were right in front of me. That’s so genius I almost feel it must have been an accident.!<

SH2 remake is sooo good. I’m in disbelief, honestly—and I’m still not convinced Konami will take Silent Hill f seriously enough. God willing.

But yes, if you’re interested, play SH2 remake.

Ah, but here we have to get pedantic a little bit: producing an AGI through current known methods is intractable.

I didn’t quite understand this at first. I think I was going to say something about the paper leaving the method ambiguous, thus implicating all methods yet unknown, etc, whatever. But yeah, this divide between solvable and “unsolvable” shifts if we ever break NP-hard and have to define some new NP-super-hard category. This does feel like the piece I was missing. Or a piece, anyway.

e.g. humans don’t fit the definition either.

I did think about this, and the only reason I reject it is that “human-like or -level” matches our complexity by definition, and we already have a behavior set for a fairly large n. This doesn’t have to mean that we aren’t still below some curve, of course, but I do struggle to imagine how our own complexity wouldn’t still be too large to solve, AGI or not.

Anyway, the main reason I’m replying again at all is just to make sure I thanked you for getting back to me, haha. This was definitely helpful.

Hey! Just asking you because I’m not sure where else to direct this energy at the moment.

I spent a while trying to understand the argument this paper was making, and for the most part I think I’ve got it. But there’s a kind of obvious, knee-jerk rebuttal to throw at it, seen elsewhere under this post, even:

If producing an AGI is intractable, why does the human meat-brain exist?

Evolution “may be thought of” as a process that samples a distribution of situation-behaviors, though that distribution is entirely abstract. And the decision process for whether the “AI” it produces matches this distribution of successful behaviors is yada yada darwinism. The answer we care about, because this is the inspiration I imagine AI engineers took from evolution in the first place, is whether evolution can (not inevitably, just can) produce an AGI (us) in reasonable time (it did).

The question is, where does this line of thinking fail?

Going by the proof, it should either be:

• That evolution is an intractable method. 60 million years is a long time, but it still feels quite short for this answer.
• Something about it doesn’t fit within this computational paradigm. That is, I’m stretching the definition.
• The language “no better than chance” for option 2 is actually more significant than I’m thinking. Evolution is all chance. But is our existence really just extreme luck? I know that it is, but this answer is really unsatisfying.

I’m not sure how to formalize any of this, though.

The thought that we could “encode all of biological evolution into a program of at most size K” did made me laugh.

but there’s no reason to think we can’t achieve it

They provide a reason.

Just because you create a model and prove something in it, doesn’t mean it has any relationship to the real world.

What are we science deniers now?

I would if it had any lasting power. I mean, can’t they just push out another eula update 6 months from now when this change is no longer useful to them?

Fuck arbitration, of course, I’m just not expecting this to really mean anything.

I’m not gonna go looking for scans or anything, but KnowYourMeme lists the popularity of this one as starting between 2013 and 2015, and I definitely remember seeing this phrase in a textbook around 2010 or 2011. So honestly, I might blame Pearson or McGraw Hill.

During the third or fourth time I was mad that 3D hadn’t taken off like technicolor, I though “fine! I’ll just look at trees and hallways in real life then!” And yeah, it kinda works.

There’s a lot of beauty in the world if you just, you know, look at it.

I know a few people who have become more anti green because of JSO,

And you let them? What kind of limp-dick shit is this.

deleted by creator

And why should those things be stopped? See, unlike you, “I believe in freedom.” If people don’t like their company town, they shall simply move away~.

I said it is better if the government doesn’t verify all the code that makes it on the internet.

You also said this apropos of nothing. I didn’t say anything about vetting code. You think I care if Biden has read your commit messages.

Oh, I understand. So, it was advertisers who fueled the 2021 capital riots.

What if that authority only disallowed bad things like murder and insider trading. Hm. Yeah, that doesn’t really feel like North Korea at all.

And what part of this requires the facebook engagement algorithm?

And how ads on TV are sometimes so much louder than the show they’re cut between. And the glitches! Sometimes, you have to completely power cycle your phone to fix something simple. And how Facebook’s curated, algorithmic feed sends people down extremist pipelines, fueling things like public shootings and the January 2021 Capital riots. And how the continued atomization of society into smaller and smaller pieces (e.g. suburbia) has made people lonelier than they ever have been. And how the displacement of work onto capable machines never seems to yield benefits onto the people whose work is being displaced, only their bosses.

I guess if all you remember are Letterman’s fumbling grandpa jokes about what the Internet is, gosh dang, even useful for, I could see why you’d think nobody’s criticisms are real.

Let’s imagine that there are 16 good things about computers, and 3 bad ones.

I don’t like the bad ones.

people talked so much shit on them.

So, what shit were these morons saying then, hm?

Now, we all have the future generations of them in our pockets.

And nothing bad ever came of this. That’s true, that’s true.

Which applications?