The another alien biologist would discredit the first by pointing out they are in fact different subspecies but all the same species, by definition of species and subspecies
Even better, you’ve given ~15 people a real life before and after data point you can never un do, this is great since you also said how much better the team performed as a result
Oh oh I can participate “how does discrete log speed up intersect with class sentiment? Did anybody else think about how the part is a part of the whole?” Don’t try to exclude me from the discussion!
They don’t have to be fully sentient just more sentient than the bottom 10% of people, a goal function like energy storage with a counterfacuals algo will probably yield surprisingly familiar emergent behaviors
My theory: It’s a touchy subject. It has not been inhibitory up to this point (mid late 2010s) to divide things into things that follow laws, and things that are complex intersections of many systems of social power and where each individuals personal epistemology must be considered in the context of a holistic analysis that is not loaded with preconceptions about values we acquired during socialization and now that you can process fifty exabytes of data did you even think about what if your programs aren’t accurate representations of reality, sheesh this is why engineers shouldn’t make public policy
Case in point: other comment links to Pearl’s book. He has been writing about general causality for decades, but his latest book shows he realized there is a desperate need to communicate the basics to people who like the modes of thinking that cause them to avoid trusting mathematical “solutions”
O i wonder if we need to all together think about rules of use for if you could do this for humans faces. You have to think more about the human side of things, you know. We live in a society