Penrose is saying a computer cannot understand / has no intelligence, and the incompleteness theorem proves this. Think in terms of the semantics (the meaning) of what the AI is outputting. The incompleteness theorem proves it does not understand and can never understand the semantics. It operates at the syntax level. How can something operating at the syntax level be intelligent? All it can do is look at symbols and rearrange them. There are algorithms to categorize and give these symbols (tokens/words) weights etc but all it can do is rearrange symbols. Do humans re-arrange symbols, no, they understand. They experience the color red, but to a computer the color red is a number. What is the connection between the number for red and the color red? AI pretty much collects every instance of red and in some sense approximates what red actually is.
Do you remember what happened when Russia tried to install missiles in Cuba? The USA put its foot down and was willing to have a nuclear war. Same thing is happening in Russia, making Ukraine part of NATO is just too close. Why is it so hard for people to understand this?
Ukraine (after abandoning efforts after the MAP rejection -- done at Russia's insistence -- in 2008) only started looking at NATO membership again after Russia invaded, so it is ludicrously disconnected from reality (but exactly representative of Russian propaganda!) to try to use that to justify the invasion.
Not sure what the point you are making is? Should we just keep going back in history and try to cherry pick events to blame and justify current conflicts? That can go on indefinitely and is why we keep having wars.
The current war started with the 2014 invasion by Russia.
Claiming that the invasion of Ukraine by Russia is caused and justified by a thing which happened after and in response to that invasion is arguing for retrocausality. It is not "going back in history and cherry picking events" to point out when and how the current war started in a discussion of the causes of the current war, especially when an event that happened after and in response to the start of the current war is argued to justify the aggressor in the current war.
so you would preffer russian troops killing political opponents and protesters in ua, like they did since 1992 in belarus till these day to avoid """coup"""?
or you prefer russian troops did 10x more massacre and hide it, instead they did 10x less in bucha and did not have time to hide?
btw just talk with pl and cz old people how their western coup was going.
seems like people prefer western coup to russian massacress and mass graves...
The west does things even worse than that to non white people and the west does near nothing (usually perpetrating this behavior) to avoid coups the way you’re saying.
There was a coup orchestrated by the west in Ukraine in 2014. Followed by an escalation of a complicated situation that is not clear cut like people in the west like to make things seem. After the coup, there was suppression of Russian things by the western backed and planted regime.
Of course things may have eventually escalated if Ukraine and the west are doing that and the Russian separatists in the east are provoking in DPR and LDR.
I am sympathetic to Kissinger, Dugin, and Mearsheimer views on geopolitics if you must know.
> Should we just keep going back in history and try to cherry pick events to blame and justify current conflicts
But, it is you that did just that. You picked up an event from the 1960's in a totally different continent, to justify Russian continued agressions against Ukraine.
I answered by actually pointing out an event from 10 years ago that's directly related to this war.
Oh. That's probably because we don't share the same definition of what is a "coup".
For me, it's clear that a "coup" is not when the democratic will of the people outs a puppet that was put in place by Moscow. While you have the opposite opinion.
This reminds me of when westerners will keep pointing to Xinjiang. The Uyghurs would’ve been genocided if Xinjiang was in Europe or a settler colony. How do westerners react to Xinjiang? With chauvinism. Keep calling it a genocide. Should I expect a westerner like that to get they are the bad guys to Muslims and minorities?
Well missiles on Cuba might also be intended for defense. As USSR leader wrote in a letter to US president, "you know that one cannot invade the country with missiles" or something along these lines.
Am I? The modern west are the most evil empires ever in history. I’m sure I can trust what western chauvinists say about their hegemony across the world as they bomb and do regime changes around the world.
A person supporting NATO as “defense” is supporting, for example, the Libyan regime change by the west and NATO.
Here's France24's take in 2014 when Ukraine voted to abandon "non-aligned" status: https://www.france24.com/en/20141223-ukraine-parliament-vote...Russia’s annexation of the Crimean Peninsula and its support for the separatist insurgency appear partly rooted in fears that the Western military alliance could expand its presence on the Russian border.
My personal opinion is that these events in 2019 were the last straw for Putin. He probably made the decision to invade early in 2020....but had to pause those plans while the whole world grappled with COVID. It then took them into mid-2021 to get the ball rolling on staging their forces for invasion, and then they were delayed again due to Xi Jinping telling Putin to not fuck up his Beijing Olympics or he wouldn't get tacit support from the PRC. All of which meant that the early-2022 invasion was likely caused by NATO-related issues that were looking increasingly concerning 3 years earlier.
This kind of thinking is what leads to zero progress. Also I think most people will be surprised how unless a lot of the data is compared to private sector data. I.e, in 2017 Equifax leaked data on 150 million people and no one cared (you get a free 6month credit check). That data went to foreign governments and private databases and it is easy to access on darkweb so real actual scammers and criminals have it. Millions of people were targeted for scamming because of this. That is just ONE leak. Now imagine the amount of data Visa has on your for example, all your purchases. Apps that have collected your browsing history and actual GPS location. Don't think this data isn't sold and combined with other databases. There are companies that just collect data and buy data. And you are worried about 1 database with people given explicit access makes me think the real objection is something else.
By your logic we should just do away with cybersecurity in general. Clearly, it's all already out there so it isn't a problem!
We've already had the occasional large leak and survived, why not just leak continuously! Also leave your doors unlocked, you wouldn't want robbers to break an expensive door to get into your house, and most of your stuff isn't worth anything anyway!
What company do you work for so I can tell them to fire you for negligence? Nobody hire this person.
How can you possibly disagree with this and call yourself good at your job or a technologist? What an embarrassing take. Seriously you might want to delete your post if you want to ever be employed again. Actually trying to help you here.
> I.e, in 2017 Equifax leaked data on 150 million people and no one cared (you get a free 6month credit check)
What are you even talking about? People (myself included) were fucking livid! The reason we got the 6mo credit check was because so many people tried to claim the monetary compensation (which the court had ruled they were owed!) that Equifax was unable (unwilling) to pay the resulting volume of money. The 6mo credit check was the weasel compromise that the Trump regulatory apparatus rubber stamped.
Okay so you care, do you think politicians who are now pretending to be concerned for privacy reasons care? Think the average american realizes that they have never cared about privacy and they look like clowns pretending like all the sudden they do.
The average american citizen doesn't care about privacy? Go outside and look through the window inside peoples homes. See how long you last until the cops are called on you.
I was trying to say that the average american does care, but the average politician does not care. But the point is that recently there has been a reason to pretend to care. i.e, to oppose dodge. They need a reason to oppose dodge and concerned for privacy has that "for the people" tone to it. So the insane part is how a cause like privacy suddenly is important when there is a political need for it to be important, i.e, to find a reason to oppose dodge. When the opposing party is trying to solve a problem you as a politician you need to oppose it. It doesn't matter if it is good or bad. You as the opposing party need to find the bad side of it. And the reason cannot be "I am in the opposing party" or "because I want to be the one to solve the problem". It has to be a possible real reason. So which came first actual concern for privacy or the need to be concerned for privacy. Clearly the need to be concerned for privacy. This kind of why two party system works, because you always have someone opposing what you are doing even if it is right, just to keep it in check.
Why does other peoples' sincerity or lack thereof dictate what I am allowed to be outraged by? "Whatabout whatabout whatabout"; what about you worry less whether other people meet your standards for legitimate outrage and worry more about an unelected billionaire giving the federal government the old private equity pump 'n dump?
Is this article written by AI? Seems poorly written, few real details and substance, short so that it is within its context window. More like trying to market instead of report.
No, they don't even mention that TTS hired 150 new employees just in the past year. It's all one sided partisan biased clickbait and FUD, just like all their stories. It's not journalism meant to inform.
For me cannabis 100 percent effects sleep. You should determine that for yourself, which quite easy to do by keeping a dream journal for 1 month on weed and completely free from weed. That for me is reason enough not to do it. Sleep in critical for high performance, for many people sleep might not be the limiting factor but it is likely a huge factor to being at your best each day.
My understanding is that not having H100s is irrelevant because most Chinese companies can partner or just own companies in say Australia that can load up on H100s in their data centers in Australia and "rent them out" or offer a service to the Chinese parent company.
Might be a projection, i.e, you think teens do drugs to be cool. My group of friends we were legit curious read books like The Doors of Perceptions where we thought we would meet God or Aliens travel to astrospace. Any recent books like that? That made teens curious about drugs?
