I get upset because of upsets me first and foremost. If others get upset and I don’t, it doesn’t change my feelings. If they share their reasoning, I can see their point of view. If it makes sense, I can empathize with them because I see how it has upset them. It still may not upset me. Sometimes they will present a view that is compelling that will then make me upset.

That’s how it was designed. That’s how everyone uses it.

I was curious about the studies. The only thing I came across about outcomes was this BMJ review that says:

Bullies were more likely to have trouble keeping a job and honouring financial obligations. They were more likely to be unemployed.

I’d like to try Linux with minimal commitment and no setup. Give it real test drive with some of my most important tools.

If and when I decide to make the switch, I want to have access to my normal windows machine. I’d keep it around if I need it. But prefer if it went away slowly. I want to work with and communicate with windows users with neither of us having to jump through weird hoops.

I want my printer to work.

Problems will come up, but I don’t want it to dominate my time.

I’m sure most of you will say not to worry, but until I’ve logged some real hours, I will.

Here’s Simon Willison’s write up of how he uses AI. He’s been using it for a couple of years and distilled his methods in this article. He also discussed when and how he vibe codes.

Unschooling and by extension, the democratically run Free Schools come to mind.

US manufacturing was dominant through the thirties and forties. It really shone in the 40s under a war time economy. It was a sleeping giant and the world knew it. Pennsylvania outputted more steel than Japan and Germany combined. Audacious goals set by President Roosevelt were mocked by Hitler as audacious Hollywood goals. The US easily surpassed these goals.

It was an amazing display of competence. The only other countries to match the intensity of growth would the USSR during the five year plan and the PRC during the eighties. But both of them were starting from an agricultural economy. The USSR never reached the American manufacturing peak and China has surpassed.

The unprecendent dominance is due in no small part because the rivals needed to rebuild. But under representing America’s position with regards to labor, capital, resources and state coordinated mobilization would be a serious error.

I’m gonna answer from the perspective of someone who believes the world is a better place when it is led by America without reverting to a thin jingoist ideology. These aren’t my views, but a steel man of someone I would disagree with.

Why does America feel the need to control the world?

In the wake of the world wars, we realized that the world is best off with one power to lead the world. No powers and multiple powers will result in another world war. We were the best position to take that role after WW2 and resist the Soviet union’s attempt to gaining that position.

Do what they say?

Many of these countries don’t do what America says because America says it. Heck, many go against what we say. But they believe in a better world and when they remember that, they undtand that America is putting themselves in the most danger by clearing that path for the rest of the free world.

Instead of taking care of their own problems at home?

The problems we have at home are pretty limited. Most of these problems are born out of laziness. But we keep the criminals in check both at home and abroad.

When did the US become police officer of the world and enforcer?

If we didn’t step up after ww2, the world would have slipped into another world war or deem communism run rampant.

I guess my question is who gave the Americans the right?

The civilized world at the end of WW2. And under our leadership, the world is safer and healthier for it.

I say this as an American. But would not the world be a better place if we just minded our own business and quit nation building and stoking non existant fires?

From communism to extreme religious views, we are the only ones who are capable and willing to step up and protect the world against that. It’s a difficult and thankless job.

Sadly it’s been a week. I’ve read this several times as closely as I could and tried to understand where my apprehension lies. I spent some time with the wiki link to counterfactuals and wanted to really dedicate more time doing so, but wasn’t able to dedicate the time to it.

So, again, to restart the conversation, I wonder if, I have two separate confusions. The first, if consciousness is a property that is weakly emergent in brains, what is a brain?

I think I have a hard time buying that consciousness is a property of a brain and not mind. And I get that you are not trying to prove that it does. I’m far more interested in why, in the face of minimal support, we would align ourselves with weak emergence over strong emergence.

I have a lingering second problem. What is a model? In that wiki link, it has a three layer model: association, intervention, and counterfactuals. I would be hard pressed to consider the first two layers as sufficient for bing considered a model. But I think the three layer model doesn’t, as far as I’ve read, address intention, causal connection, or first order simulation. I think I’m hard pressed to see a collection of cells, neuron or otherwise, doing more than creating a response to a condition.

Do you not get the meme… It’s funny because it’s true.

Data and media: two tricky Latin plurals and how to handle them

Not in English.

1. Is your bond solid?
2. Does he know the value of work?
3. Does he know how much most people would have to work to get that phone?
4. Does his friendship nourish him?

Next time the parents decide they, assumingly from a good place, give your son an expensive gift, have them run it by you. Talk to them like they actually care for your son and know, for yourself, that your care is different than theirs. We all need a lot of caring adults when we’re young.

Here’s some others:

• Windows is garbage. The last time windows was good was Windows [10, 7, 2000, NT, 3.1, O/S2].
• don’t you care about your privacy?
• All AI is all slop all the time. If you think of using AI you are garbage.
• Star Trek. I have no issues with my Star Trek homies. Y’all are awesome.

"Welcome back to tonight’s episode of “Is it AI or 700 Indian Engineers!!” 👏🏾👏🏾 👏🏾

I watched this video a while back. Apparently, they were looking to develop a universe that they could make a sequel in. They ended up with Hades.

My group recently switched to Matrix and so this would be a tough sell, but it seems interesting. I haven’t been a fan of Matrix and miss the ease of UI in discord, but was happy to leave with it’s direction. How would you sell it with a small group that has small, but mounting usability issues with Matrix?

I should start off and say I’m less interested in the quesiton of free will than the relationship between consciousness and matter. I want to reframe that so you know what I’m focused on.

Modern theories are a lot more integrative. … [I]nstead it is an essential active element in the thought process.

Here, I’m assuming “it” is a conscious perception. But now I’m confused again because I don’t think any theory of mind would deny this.

On the other hand, if “it” is “the brain” then I need to know more about the theory. As I understanding it, the theory says that the brain creates models. Models are mental. I just don’t know how that escapes the black box that connects to the mind. But as you assert and I understand, it is:

stimuli -> CPM ⊆ brain -> consciousness update CPM -?> black box -?> mind -?> brain -> nervous system -> response to stimuli

If it isn’t obvious, the question marks represent where I don’t understand the model.

So if I were to narrow down my concerns, it would be:

1. Is a model a mental process?
2. If mental processes are part of the brain, then how so?

“text so that the comment is federated properly”

Say what now?