Stephen T. Crye

9.6K posts

Stephen T. Crye banner
Stephen T. Crye

Stephen T. Crye

@stevecrye

All that is required for ignorance and superstition to triumph is for men of reason and knowledge to be silent. Polite debate welcomed, rudeness muted.

Milky Way, Sol, Earth, USA, TX Katılım Eylül 2014
511 Takip Edilen752 Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Stephen T. Crye
Stephen T. Crye@stevecrye·
Made it to 16,182 feet over Monroe Utah the time I flew with my Mountain High Oxy system! So sweet! #RedRocks2022
English
21
6
146
0
Raylene - Undercover Indie ®
There is a reason for that. Les Paul players prefer Marshall amps because they deliver natural compression when paired with Humbucker Pups. They offer aggressive muscular distorted crunchy tones . Fender amps are generally preferred for their clear, dynamic, and warm clean tones while using a pedal to manage distortion and overdrive. =)
The Deuce LIVE!!@PeaceCatsWino2

@UndercoverIndy Les Paul players overwhelmingly LOVE Marshall amplifiers it seems

English
21
4
75
3K
Jen C 🇨🇦
Jen C 🇨🇦@VintageNeuroNrd·
@AJamesMcCarthy Angry kitties ftw 🥰. Good thing Miley is cute and 18 years old. Old enough to say what she wants I guess
Jen C 🇨🇦 tweet media
English
2
1
54
1.4K
Andrew McCarthy
Andrew McCarthy@AJamesMcCarthy·
Gregory is apparently giving the sitter an earful
Andrew McCarthy tweet media
English
178
299
10.6K
66.4K
Zack Golden
Zack Golden@CSI_Starbase·
If you bought one of these and never used it after the first week. Hit me up… I might be able to take it off your hands. If the entire thing is painted green for some reason…that would be a deal sealer instead of a breaker. Thanks for your attention to this matter.
Zack Golden tweet media
English
13
5
315
11.2K
Stephen T. Crye
Stephen T. Crye@stevecrye·
@AnthonyFGomez @BillyM2k Or use it to watch beautiful and uplifting things, and access all of the information that humanity has amassed over thousands of years.
English
0
0
0
3
Anthony Gomez
Anthony Gomez@AnthonyFGomez·
You guys... please stop making funny videos : x
Anthony Gomez tweet media
English
3
0
20
1.7K
Stephen T. Crye
Stephen T. Crye@stevecrye·
@CSI_Starbase Thanks for the reply! I love your work. Maybe I'll have a chance to meet you in person during flight 12. I'm only paying 70 bucks a month, which is cheaper than what I used to pay for Spectrum.
English
0
0
2
50
Zack Golden
Zack Golden@CSI_Starbase·
@stevecrye yeah i considered upgrading. But its not worth it to pay extra when I typically upload videos 12 to 24 hours before posting. Post people post within minutes of uploading so the increased speed makes more sense for them
English
1
0
8
362
Stephen T. Crye
Stephen T. Crye@stevecrye·
@thejackbeyer In 1968 as a 12-year-old kid I saw 2001 A Space Odyssey at the Miami Beach Cinerama theater. The curved screen with the skinny aspect ratio blew my mind and turned me into a space freak at a young age.
English
0
0
2
59
Stephen T. Crye
Stephen T. Crye@stevecrye·
youtu.be/wmE8DZaNJIk?si… I was expecting yet another sled ride. Because I am now right at the top of the weight range on my wings, the better glide of the Lyght has made it easier to bench up at Agave. But I'm stubborn, so I keep hiking up with the A5. Light synoptic with moderate thermals. Agave is tricky with thermals, because the hill is so low that bad cycle timing can (often) result in a sled ride. This time, either skill or luck (probably luck) had me launch into a nice, long-lasting cycle that persisted long enough to make it to The Triangle; then more luck prevented a lull from dirting me. The result was 90 minutes of classic FMSP sunset flying! Landed as the sun kissed the horizon. Had a chance to test B-line ears (painful on my hands) and some gentle "spirals." I have not been posting every flight - busy, and my desire to render in ProRes (huge 80 GB files that take a looong time to render, upload and process) have made me lazy. Sorry, trying to get back in the swing of vid production. I have about 3 dozen on the A5 - about 15 hours - plus about 10 on the Lyght in the pipeline. The A5 is finally settling in and is not so twitchy. I still prefer the cush ride of the Lyght, but the A5 is my go-to wing for tighter tricky launches, or when speed and glide are not as critical. Even with brakes lengthened by 6 cm, it is snappy in the turns, and easy to land in nil wind.
YouTube video
YouTube
English
0
0
1
37
Acrobatic Hobbit
Acrobatic Hobbit@acrobatichobbit·
@jzpitts Oh boy, I haven't looked forward to a movie I'm so long. I'm so excited for this one.
English
2
0
4
32
J. Z. Pitts
J. Z. Pitts@jzpitts·
Just came out of an IMAX screening for #ProjectHailMary Highly recommend. Great adaptation of the book. This is one to see on the big screen.
English
6
0
32
548
Joe Barnard 🚀
Joe Barnard 🚀@joebarnard·
I used to have a lot more fun on this website. Hot take though; I don't think it's only because of the changes Elon has made. I've just been growing more grossed out by the way social media(not just X) pushes people to fight over shit that doesn't matter
English
64
22
737
31.2K
Diana Dukic
Diana Dukic@diana_dukic·
Went from scrolling 24/7 to not even wanting to log in. X just hasn’t been hitting the same lately.
English
511
158
5.1K
1.3M
Stephen T. Crye
Stephen T. Crye@stevecrye·
@creation247 @elonmusk @diana_dukic I'm sorry, but I don't see any of that. I don't follow people who are pessimistic, and since I'm always mostly looking at what the people I follow post, and replies to those posts, I see optimism.
English
1
0
1
33
Stephen T. Crye
Stephen T. Crye@stevecrye·
@diana_dukic @elonmusk When it's impossible to reach 2000 followers, you'll never get any payouts. But I don't expect payouts. I follow accounts that I like and that's all I need to do. I never use the home tab. I only look at accounts that I follow.
English
2
0
2
276
Diana Dukic
Diana Dukic@diana_dukic·
@elonmusk The instability is the biggest hurdle. Between unpredictable reach and a 'For You' feed that feels disconnected from my actual community, the ROI on high-quality content has plummeted. Creators need a reliable feedback loop, not a void. And bigger payouts would be nice too lol
English
210
20
1.5K
151.8K
Ryan
Ryan@RyanLawhead·
@stevecrye @DJSnM Cool they should stick to planes at this point 😅
English
1
0
1
38
Scott Manley
Scott Manley@DJSnM·
With Orion being set for a Centaur V upper stage NASA could start launching it into LEO on Vulcan. Then there would be no need for Starliner, for LEO crew redundancy. And if a ferry stage were implemented to take it to the moon then SLS isn’t needed for Artemis. Boeing would not be happy.
English
63
33
795
35.9K
Stephen T. Crye
Stephen T. Crye@stevecrye·
@RyanLawhead @DJSnM I would much rather ride on a Boeing commercial jet than on an Airbus. Boeing jets are smoother, have bigger windows, feel more powerful.
English
1
0
0
70
Ryan
Ryan@RyanLawhead·
@DJSnM Who cares what Boeing is. They aren’t producing results.
English
1
0
18
1.2K
Stephen T. Crye
Stephen T. Crye@stevecrye·
@elonmusk @ZubyMusic The solution I use is easy. I don't look at my home feed. I only look at accounts that I follow. So you may wonder, how do I find new accounts to follow? I see them when the accounts I follow reply to other accounts.
English
0
1
2
28
ZUBY:
ZUBY:@ZubyMusic·
It feels like the overall experience of social media has dropped significantly in the last few months. It's not unique to this platform, but all of the ones I use. Am I alone in this sentiment?
English
702
75
2.7K
202K
Stephen T. Crye
Stephen T. Crye@stevecrye·
@Devon_Eriksen_ Lee Smolin, "The trouble with physics." It's still a relevant book today. A great read for people who want to understand why string theory is not the answer. a.co/d/00iGO9Y8
English
0
0
1
39
Devon Eriksen
Devon Eriksen@Devon_Eriksen_·
A few possible counterpoints here. First of all, "cancer" isn't one thing. It's a blanket catch-all term for all the ways a cell can go wrong which cause unrestricted growth. So, beating cancer actually means finding better and better ways to detect and remove those cells. This process is already happening and has been happening for some time. And unless democrats win a lot of elections and bust us back to the preindustrial age, there will certainly be a time where we can look back and say "we've beaten cancer", because cancer is a minor inconvenience requiring a house call and an injection, there's not going to be one moment where that suddenly happens. No great breakthrough, no eureka moment, just thousands of little inventions. But that's not the central question. The central question is "how much could a hypothetical AI that is smarter than the smartest human help with that?" The answer is certainly not zero. IQ matters. If it didn't, the third world would not be the third world. But if we assume that IQ matters infinitely, and our hypothetical superintelligence could beat all cancers with the flick of a metaphorical wrist, then that idea carries the hidden assumption that intelligence is the bottleneck in this whole process. I'm not sure we can just jump to that conclusion. Intelligence is the ability to analyze and understand data. Which means the quality of your thinking is only as good as the quality of your data. Let's take a different hypothetical which I think will make this more clear: Could a superintelligence solve physics? For that one, I would answer "no". Because in physics, hypotheses are derived with math, and then verified by experiment. And as we have recently seen, it is very easy for physicists as a group to come up with infinity varieties of string theory and other such things, hypotheticals which explain everything... but then fail when experimentally tested. The standard practice in modern physics is to move the goalposts and apply for another grant. So how would super-AI "solve" physics? No matter how brilliant it was, it would also have to test its ideas, requiring very complex and expensive hardware to do so. In physics, that's the bottleneck. Now, would super-AI, acting in other areas, transform the economy and make those experiments cheaper? Yes, maybe. But that's beside the point. The point is that physics cannot be solved with intelligence alone. Which might be true in other areas as well. Now, some people object to this line of thinking. They protest that a super-AI could run experiments in simulation. Well, okay, that's great for doing engineering in areas where the relevant physics is already understood. But to verify hypotheses in fundamental physics, you would need a model that simulates what you are trying to test, which would only be possible if you already had the understanding you are trying to achieve. Otherwise, the simulation would be like the string theory hypothesis... internally consistent, but not necessarily connected to reality in any meaningful way. Life is an IQ test, yes. But life is not a test of IQ alone.
Roko 🐉@RokoMijic

Miller's take that "Superintelligence" won't cure cancer and death is going to age really badly. Firstly, it's wrong by definition. "Superintelligence" means an AI that that greatly exceeds the cognitive performance of humans in all domains. That is literally the definition of "Superintelligence". So it must greatly exceed humans at curing cancer specifically. Presumably Miller thinks that humans are capable of curing cancer in principle (otherwise, why do we devote human researchers to this task?), therefore by definition any "Superintelligence" must be able to cure cancer. Secondly, Miller starts bounding the capabilities of "Superintelligence" by comparing it to contemporary LLM-based systems. There are two ways this could go wrong: - either LLM-based-systems are not capable of curing cancer, in which case they will never achieve "Superintelligence". Or, sufficient improvements may yield LLM-based systems that do actually cure cancer in which case they might make it to "Superintelligence" (or might not, if they are bad at some other task). I think people like Geoffrey Miller should just stop talking about "Superintelligence" if they are going to abuse the term like this. But set aside the definitional games: maybe AI systems that we can actually build will be bad at biomedical science? This is certainly the case today. Modern LLM-based systems are good at coding and at commonsense and generic research tasks, but not that good at anything else. LLMs work well when they get fast feedback. But, so do humans. Anyone sufficiently intelligent can get good at math and coding. Getting good at biology requires a lot of equipment. We haven't really connected modern AIs to automated labs yet. When we do, I do expect significant progress just as we saw progress when we connected AI to the internet. In a way, LLMs are just the result of connecting the preexisting AI stuff to large scale data. We already had neural language models in 2015. I used to work on language models, just before LLMs took off. Small language models are not impressive or that useful. So I have seen a full cycle of this playing out over a decade. x.com/gmiller/status…

English
25
9
232
13.1K
Kekius Maximus
Kekius Maximus@Kekius_Sage·
Why is consciousness so rare in the universe?
English
1.3K
121
1.4K
108.2K