br121 · HackerTrans

20 jam yang laludiscuss

There are ethical use cases for this research. The first that comes to mind is mapping the brain before a surgery. Right now some surgeries are made with the patient concious to verify that relevant brain damages are not being done. Having a deeper knowledge of the patient's brain before the surgery may decrease risks further. The bad scenario (using targeted content to hook the user to a screen) already exists, it's not like it can get that worse (or at least so I hope)

br121

bulan laludiscuss

It doesn't convert bogosort into heapsort either, despite the second being much faster than the first. I'm guessing that it's not that easy going from one to the other because the only thing they have in common is the output (and only after you have checked the last value), so if the transformation is not hard-coded into the compiler, the odds of it randomly discovering the optimization is close to zero

br121

bulan laludiscuss

Looking at rebellions and revolutions in Europe (just because I know european history better than asian history), they tend to start when someone (not necessarily the poor) feel than the upper class/the king is not doing what it's supposed to be doing. It's not a cash grab, and in a lot of revolt what the rich have and don't deserve is not taken and distributed, but rather destroyed to show that it's about punishing traitors of the social contract, not robbing them.

br121

bulan laludiscuss

Except they said that it actually matter. The reason they didn't said that all those people with a potential conflict of interest lied is that it's not necessarily true. After all the article didn't reveal some secret conspiracy, it higlited the use of not disclosing some public, easily accessible informations by some media outlets, which are the ones to blame

br121

bulan laludiscuss

"our country isn't ready for war" is more difficult to disproof than "solar panels only last for 15 years", so while I agree that disclosures should go for every conflict on interest, it makes sense that the research focused only on this portion of them

br121

bulan laludiscuss

Atreus' question come out of fear, but Kratos' response is what the article focus on. Kratos does not take any joy in killing, he does that out of necessity and would have loved for that necessity not to arise. He could have boasted "I have killed bigger things", but instead he choose words of resignation against a kill or be killed fate he was trying to escape

br121

3 bulan yang laludiscuss

Research on the human body start with an observation, for the good reason that the omniscent orb has not invented yet, and what is causation and what is correlation is yet to be determined. Then, sometimes after years of research, it can be determined if what was observed was causation or correlation. That's why study that don't bring to a new discovery are extremely valuable nevertheless, as they show a path that was just a false lead and allow other researches to seek for something else

br121

3 bulan yang laludiscuss

It's useful in saving the pilot's life. With less advanced tecnologies, more pilots would have been shoot down. It's useful in targeted attacks, but they have proved themself uneffective (at least for now) as the new leadership is alined with the objective of the replaced one. It's close to useless when it comes to making the war cost-effective, which start being a relevant metric when the conflict start lasting too long. Of course the US has a bigger economy, so all the news about cheaper systems damaging or destroying quite expensive ones may still lead to a US victory, but a costly one for sure

br121

4 bulan yang laludiscuss

It's just a reference to how CRT-era games look better on CRT as the devs were working with CRTs in mind and taking advantage of their way of rendering images[1]. I don't think there is actually a noticeable difference for the website itself, CRT performs a sort of interpolation which is great for old games that accounted for it, but for content that is already high-enough in resolution there is not any improvement

[1]https://wackoid.com/game/10-pictures-that-show-why-crt-tvs-a...

br121

6 bulan yang laludiscuss

I sometimes listen to podcasts, close to none of them were discovered inside a podcast app, and the one that were, it was because an author of a podcast I was already listening started a separate one. I used to think that podcast had a discoveribility issue, but I'm honestly not that sure anymore. I don't usually get new books/ebooks suggested by my phone either, and after all, a podcast and an ebook have more things in common than different from each other. I trust word of mouth over algorithm to give me good reading suggestion, and off course I do the same with ebook (in the more sporadic occasion when I want to use ears rather than eyes), maybe it's just unreasonable to expect podcast to act differently.

br121

6 bulan yang laludiscuss

The article doesn't say, "we shouldn't ban for children because it's bad for adults as well", it says, "we shouldn't regulate for the non-voting pouplation only". Alcohol is regulated for adults, not as much as for children of course, but it's nevertheless regulated (and taxed), and from the same people arguing that we should raise the drinking age (in europe, where it's indeed lower than health expert suggests), we hear argument on increased regulations for adults as well. The social media ban, on the other hand, is for children and children only

br121

6 bulan yang laludiscuss

Cigarettes and alcohol are more strictly regulated for children than for adults, but are regulated for both, because adults are allowed to harm themselves, but there is a general agreement that the law should discourage that. Yet the call for a social media ban on children is (or at least that's my impression) never accompanied with proposed regulation for adults, or a stricter enforcement of already in place but unenforced rules. I totally agree with you on how the "we shouldn't ban A, because then we should ban everything else" is a false argument, although it didn't seem to me that was the argument on the article (but close to everyone on HN catched that, so I'm going to read the article again with a fresh mind in a couple of days, maybe I just missed that)

br121

6 bulan yang laludiscuss

In the article is mentioned gambling, and how the rules are more stringent to children, but rules exists for both, and were put in place together. It seems to me (but I don't have social media, don't watch TV, and am not from UK, so I may just have missed that, so please correct me if that's the case) that the current discourse on social media is all about ban for under 16, but with no consideration on damage control for adults, so it's the "do somethings, but not to voters" situation. To your second point, we don't have research indicating social media is good for adults as well, so shouldn't the same precautionary principle apply for both (maybe with different level of precaution)?

br121

6 bulan yang laludiscuss

It's not what it says, it's more: discussion on what to ban/regulate should include all the population at risk (so in this case, the entire population), not just people at non-voting age. It doesn't even say that whe should apply the same regulation to children and adults, but pretending that something is harmful up until 16, then doesn't need any kind of regulation, is just pretending

comments