Ben Walsh

@Marxfan360948 @philosophymeme0 The tram would get stuck, unable to stay on the track or pass through the billions of people on the track as they would jam under the carriage.

@philosophymeme0 Pull the lever. If this goes ad infinitum then eventually someone will push it, killing an untold number of people.

@matthewdmarsden Car d'Or

Name the best-tasting chocolate in the world. And don't even think about posting "Hershey's." That stuff tastes like vomit-flavored wax. For me? Cadburys Dairy Milk and Milka.

@Kekius_Sage The context of the time symmetric physical laws is that they operate in an expanding space time and that universally sets the arrow of time.

Why do we remember the past but never the future if time is just another dimension?

A culture of debate and engagement can be good so long as you uphold your principles. But left-liberals refuse to engage in direct discussion or debate with those they deem to be problematic. The problem with this rule is twofold: left-liberals end up applying it far too widely, it gets applied to individuals and groups where it isn't true, i.e., the person does not qualify as a reactionary but is more accurately working things out or confused etc. And secondly, this rule ends up penalizing those on the left that decide to engage in debate with groups in a sincere way. What this all amounts to is a left-liberalism built on ascetic puritanism and a self-righteous attitude that is incapable of self-critique. In this way, left-liberalism becomes a class project of the upper middle class as these attitudes reflect the in-built desire (unconscious of course) to maintain the status quo and not to challenge the existing order of things.

AI translated Russian to Anglais goes a bit weird during an otherwise engaging sequence of scientific demonstrations. @lecturesMEPhI/shorts" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">youtube.com/@lecturesMEPhI…

Penrose's Infinity Problem (Ellis Responds) youtu.be/O1oUWjZnSZ8?si… via @YouTube

@DoozerDiffuser @pmddomingos ...and the human can halt. I've done it many times.

@pmddomingos Sure, I'll grant you that. But the Halting problem is better than Incompleteness, better than Cantor's diagonalization, better than Tarski's Paradox. Because it corresponds with a real-world problem, not just a chosen symbolic representation of it.

The human brain is not Turing-complete. That's how silly the notion of Turing completeness is.

@PWenger53593 @BDSixsmith Banality. The mundane can be quotidian. The banal smacks of soullessness. These two were depraved.

@BDSixsmith So much for the mundanity of evil…

This has really changed how I look at Ian Brady and Myra Hindley.

@MaryRuwart After all, what would the good be for?

Food for thought…

@aaronbourgoin @walterkirn That's why it is the highest art.

@walterkirn there ain’t no money in poetry ….

Made me tear up. Just loved him.

This gave me chills. Watch.

Atlassian's revenue: $1.79 billion last quarter Atlassian's move: fire the engineer who built their infrastructure his move: post a 38-minute breakdown of every system he built, free for anyone to copy what he revealed: > Envoy proxy instead of enterprise load balancers > sidecar architecture for auth, logging, rate limits > DynamoDB + SQS for async provisioning > Packer + SaltStack for automated VM deployments at scale Atlassian charges per employee across 350,000 customers this guy just handed you the enterprise playbook for free save this

@KateXGate No human being would stack books this way.

“I have time. I have lots of time. You don’t own me...I own you. I read you. I'll take one off the stack right now..." 😉 📚 #Shelfie

Physics absolutely requires philosophy. Only "relies on facts” carries conceptual weight until you realize facts do not interpret themselves. The interpretation layer is philosophy. Ask yourself what is “real” versus mathematically predictive? Want to go into String theory with me? What is an observer? What is measurement, time, causality. You have entered philosophical territory whether you admit it or not. Physics is not self interpreting. Data does not walk out of experiments and explain itself or make connections to other ontologies. Humans build conceptual frameworks around observation. That is philosophy. Period. Newton, Einstein, Bohr, Wheeler, Bohm, Penrose, Levin. None of them operate beyond philosophy. They were saturated in it and made better physicists bc of it. Ironically, “physics only relies on facts” is itself a philosophical claim about epistemology. 😉

@skdh Science is not a business.

I'll tell you why so many people upset about the "no hallucinated citations" ban on the arxiv: because they've all been copying citation lists from each other without checking them since the beginning of time. And why did they do this? Because half of the citations in scientific papers are politics and not to the benefit of the reader. If you don't list the right papers, your paper doesn't look 'right' and reviewers will complain that you didn't cite this-and-that other unrelated work. For what I am concerned, these are all bullshit citations that shouldn't be in the papers in the first place. They can easily be automated by "related papers" links, that are (wait for it) provided by... AI...

Instead of watching an hour of Netflix, watch this 2 hour hour Stanford lecture will teach you more about how LLMs like ChatGPT and Claude are built than most people working at top AI companies learn in their entire careers.

@CryptoCyberia They ascribe to the Captain Kirk theory of consciousness.

LLMs are basically a pile of linear algebra predicting what word is most likely to follow the words you gave. That is NOT how human brains work, and they can't be alive or conscious. If you start flirting with the idea that maybe it could be someday, you're mentally ill.

London 👏👏👏