bookmarks

To find what you need online, you require a solid general education and, above all, prior knowledge in the area related to your search

Culturally, it is increasingly the case that the first step is to go online, search for the a desired end result of a thinking process instead of engaging in learning

We detrain ourselves out of the ability to access the quality of the information and turn it into actual knowledge

We need a fully developed mental map of the subject in order to derive value from the results of an internet search

If you can’t produce a comprehensive answer with confidence and on the whim the second you read the question, you don’t have the sufficient background knowledge

Assuming that you have no comprehensive knowledge in health and fitness, terms like “aerobic capacity” or “core stability” only activate some superficial level associations

use Illuminate\Support\Facades\Cache; 2  3$lock = Cache::lock('foo', 10); 4  5if ($lock->get()) { 6 // Lock acquired for 10 seconds... 7  8 $lock->release(); 9}

Religiosity tends to decline across generations

first, public ritual participation declines; second, the importance of religion to individuals declines; and third, people shed religious affiliation

we recommend caution in interpreting longitudinal claims, due to limited data

It is well established that religion declines in Western countries

The model links modernization, particularly institutional and technological innovation, to a decline in the symbolic and social functions of religion3

biomedicine replacing religious healing, welfare states replacing spiritual reassurance—religion loses functional relevance

credibility enhancing displays (CRED’s

The central idea of CRED’s is that individuals will believe and imitate others with a higher probability if these others back up their words with hard-to-fake deeds6

Because of the increasing efficiency of secular goods, parents may still teach their children religiosity—but stop backing it up with religious behavior. This will lead children to drop their religiosity levels.

The term has become an idiom describing a group of persons, each agreeing to perform an impossibly difficult task under the misapprehension that someone else will be chosen to run the risks and endure the hardship of actual accomplishment

people say that “it takes more than intelligence to succeed in human society”. But social skills reside in the brain, not the kidneys

Humanity did not rise to prominence on Earth by lifting heavier weights than other species

Intelligence is the source of technology. If we can use technology to improve intelligence, that closes the loop and potentially creates a positive feedback cycle

human beings all have the same cognitive architecture. We all have a prefrontal cortex and limbic system and so on. If you imagine a space of all possible minds, then all human beings are packed into one small dot in mind design space. And then Artificial Intelligence is literally everything else. “AI” just means “a mind that does not work like we do”. So you can’t ask “What will an AI do?” as if all AIs formed a natural kind. There is more than one possible AI.

So that is “transhumanism” – loving life without special exceptions and without upper bound

If you take common sense and rigorously apply it, through multiple inferential steps, to areas outside everyday experience, successfully avoiding many possible distractions and tempting mistakes along the way, then it often ends up as a minority position and people give it a special name

The fight between an ambitious novice and an old master is a well-worn cliche in martial arts movies: the novice is a blur of motion, flipping and spinning. The master is mostly still. But somehow the novice’s attacks never seem to quite connect, and the master’s eventual attack is decisive.

taking YAGNI as the ultimate design principle: above single-responsibility, above choosing the best tool for the job, and above “good design

We’ve all seen codebases with hacks stacked on top of hacks, and they definitely don’t look like good design. But are hacks simple? I actually don’t think so. The problem with a hack or a kludge is precisely that it isn’t simple: that it adds complexity

the proper fix is almost always much simpler than the hack

Figuring out the simplest solution requires considering many different approaches. In other words, it requires doing engineering

Simple systems have fewer “moving pieces”: fewer things you have to think about when you’re working with them Simple systems are less internally-connected. They are composed from components with clear, straightforward interfaces

tiebreaker: simple systems are stable. If you’re comparing two states of a software system, and one will require more ongoing work if no requirements change, the other one is simpler

the cardinal sin of big tech SaaS engineering is an obsession with scale

you don’t know ahead of time where all the bottlenecks are going to be. At most you can try to make sure you’re ready for 2x or 5x the current traffic

It’s fun to decouple your service into two pieces so they can be scaled independently (I have seen this happen maybe ten times, and I have seen them actually be usefully scaled independently maybe once

Eliezer Shlomo Yudkowsky (Chicago, 11 settembre 1979) è uno scrittore, teorico dell'intelligenza artificiale e teorico delle decisioni statunitense, noto per aver divulgato l'idea dell'intelligenza artificiale amichevole,[1][2] rendendola popolare

i sistemi autonomi e adattivi siano progettati per imparare un comportamento corretto nel tempo

Egli afferma che la gentilezza (un desiderio di non nuocere agli umani) dovrebbe essere progettata fin dall'inizio, ma che i progettisti dovrebbero riconoscere sia che i loro progetti possono essere difettosi, sia che il robot imparerà ed evolverà nel tempo

lavorare per specificare gli agenti software che convergono su comportamenti predefiniti sicuri anche quando i loro obiettivi sono mal specificati

IA potrebbe fare un salto apparentemente brusco nell'intelligenza puramente come risultato dell'antropomorfismo, la tendenza umana a pensare allo 'scemo del villaggio' e a 'Einstein' come gli estremi della scala dell'intelligenza, invece di punti quasi indistinguibili sulla scala delle menti in generale

If you offered Gandhi a pill that made him want to kill people, he would refuse to take it, because he knows that then he would kill people, and the current Gandhi doesn’t want to kill people. This, roughly speaking, is an argument that minds sufficiently advanced to precisely modify and improve themselves, will tend to preserve the motivational framework they started in

The future of Earth-originating intelligence may be determined by the goals of the first mind smart enough to self-improve