How is this legal? They are essentially robbing their employees no? They have effectively converted government actions of bailing out the citizens into bailing out just me and myself only. The authorities should hit them with a big fine.
Readit Newsnetwanderer3 commented on Austria to make basic face masks compulsory in supermarkets reuters.com/article/healt... · Posted by u/tosh
Supermarkets in South East Asia countries like Vietnam would not even let you go in without a face mask. Similar to how lottery is a game of chance and to win it requires you first buying a ticket, if life and death are too a matter of luck then to cheat death due to this virus at least mandatorily you must first be wearing a face mask.
netwanderer3 commented on The origin story of the N95 mask fastcompany.com/90479846/... · Posted by u/wallflower
One major weakness of the current N95 masks is that sometimes it doesn't seal very well to the contours of people's faces. When this happens, it doesn't work as well because particles can still travel into the airway via open space gaps.
I personally have not seen this implemented, but one possible solution I believe may work is to apply a thin layer of sticky hydrogen tape right along the edges of the mask so it would act like an adhesive that helps seal the open space gaps as it can fit with the unique shape and contour of each person's face.
Medical hydrogen tape is the same material that we often see being used in those sticky pads that they put on a person's body during an electrocardiogram (EKG) test. It's also the same adhesive that used by those electro pads in TENS pain-relief machines. This sticky adhesive material is safe for human skins and can last multiple uses.
It would be great if someone could add a feature in which you can insert a removable HEPA filter so it can be swapped in and out when needed.
netwanderer3 commented on Stagnation and Scientific Incentives nber.org/papers/w26752... · Posted by u/hhs
First of all, I believe the stagnation today in scientific discoveries is resulted from the lack of big grand visions of a future that can draw inspirations.
Over the years, society has shifted into favoring financial languages and metrics in most of today communications instead of telling stories that are often associated with lifetime generational experiences. Most things are calculated based on precise risks and probabilities so naturally we would opt for the least risky path. As a result, the system has evolved into favoring incremental improvements rather than explorations of uncharted territories that are much more riskier.
In scientific publishing, this metric is represented by an over-emphasize in citations which has become the main criteria those publications are now being evaluated based on. Novelty or a desire for new experience that can generate large and meaningful impact, or even simply playful experimental ideas are no longer valued as much. Citations quantity has become the main currency in scientific publishing, and understandably has also led the community to prioritize incremental improvements.
In the paper, it mentioned that many seemingly irrelevant or uninteresting new scientific discoveries initially took a long time for the community to understand its potential, but those very same discoveries would later lead to much bigger and more meaningful inventions, such as the gene-editing tool CRISPR we have today. It took 20 years for this to happen counting from the initial discovery, so this is where the disconnection occurred.
In that sense, there is a great need to help propagating those initial discoveries both in its magnitudes and speeds so that it can receive more attentions from other scientists and community. The novelty should once again be the main focus to drive motivations and inspirations. Scientific publications shouldn't just prioritize on hard cold metrics like citations, but instead attaching more metaphors and new visions of future possibilities that can excite and propel both science community and public interests.
More than ever, people today are craving for that common naivety which used to connect everyone together into believing making the impossible possible. That's precisely what has made Elon Musk and his companies so successful.
netwanderer3 commented on DigitalOcean is laying off staff techcrunch.com/2020/01/17... · Posted by u/progapandist
I can honestly say that one of the reasons people hop onto DO is due to those amazing tutorials and documentations. I know I was.
It's surprising really that in all the praise I threw to DigitalOcean the awesome documentation and tutorials flew under my radar. That's not to say that I don't value them. Rather the complete opposite. They had become such an integral part of my life when getting my hands wet with a new technology or a tool or setting up any new software or system that I completely forgot that they were something that someone invested a lot of time writing.
I was still in college/starting out then and had never learned that most developers don't document things (let alone write tutorials). I believed there must be internal websites similar to DO's documentation and tutorials in each company and took DO for granted.
It'd be really great if you could share my thoughts about how great and instrumental the documentation and tutorials have been to Etel and the team specially.
Also, have a great weekend.
DigitalOcean's tutorials are second to none indeed. It always feels like the writers just know exactly what questions you're having.
netwanderer3 commented on Medications that change who we are bbc.com/future/article/20... · Posted by u/daveytea
How did you come to the conclusion that the phenomenon you are describing is hovering above all of us, instead of resting comfortably inside our brains in the form of neurons?
I was saying that it would be a total level of consciousness from all human individuals combined, and its power is really more than just the sum of each individual. In a sense, this could be considered as the total knowledge that our species has acquired at a given point in time.
netwanderer3 commented on How the internet helped crack the Astros' sign-stealing case espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/2... · Posted by u/danso
As a long time baseball fan, the "punishment" is a joke. This is one of the worst cheating scandals in baseball history and Rob Manfred (Commissioner of MLB) basically gave a slap on the wrist. Every team/player in the league would be willing to trade this "punishment" for a World Series title.
They really should have stripped away Astro's championship title, not sure what their justification was. Why would the Astros want to keep this championship title in their cabinet anyway? To remind themselves and their fans of what their team did that year?
netwanderer3 commented on Medications that change who we are bbc.com/future/article/20... · Posted by u/daveytea
My Python code ultimately runs on a circuit, but it feels lacking to say that my program is the circuitry. The program itself only has meaning inside of my mind, and in fact could exist equally well on paper. It exists conceptually even if it never manifests physically. So where do concepts like this exist, given that they don't exist as matter? What do we mean when we say that something like 1+1=2 is true - that that truth exists - and would exist even if there wasn't any matter to have 1 and 1 of?
The more you look at it, the more it looks like truths and ideas are even realer than the material world. After all, the only thing we know of the material world is what we experience of it in our mind. That was Plato's point, that the material world is a shadow of the real, immaterial world of thoughts, ideas, and truths.
Similar argument patterns permeate most ancient philosophies. The meme is that mind is the ultimate reality, of which the materialistic worldview is a surprisingly fragile inverse.
I like your analogy and do have a similar view in that the total consciousness level of all humans combined, at any given point in time, creates a separate universe of our own. This total consciousness level has its own rules and principles created by us which also evolves over time. It shapes all of our belief systems, actions, behaviors, etc. throughout various human civilizations in history.
It operates almost like a mind of the entire human race just hovering above all of us. This concept is pretty abstract but like you said, at any given point in time this total soul may not exist physically, but it does exist conceptually in our exclusive reality and it too constantly evolves together with us.
netwanderer3 commented on The dark ages of AI: A panel discussion at AAAI-84 (1985) researchgate.net/publicat... · Posted by u/1e
AI is going to be huge no doubt. However, in my opinion there would likely be some costly mistakes made before humans can reap its full benefits. We have been seeing a lot of AI developments but in reality it hasn't really brought us many meaningful changes as we had expected. In general our daily lives still remain pretty much the same as before. Our civilization has never experienced significant AI impacts at a large scale so mistakes may be hard to avoid, and it will serve as lessons for later generations not to repeat those same errors.
I have noticed human emotions and intelligence seem to be at odds with each other. Sometimes they are even a trade-off. The increase of one may lead to the decrease of the other. If we look around, humans today have the most advanced technologies in history, but are our lives really better compared to people's in the past? Materialistic wise, certainly yes because they are products directly produced by technologies, but mentally and emotionally it could arguably be worse.
AI and techs keep getting better and better everyday, but then human have to work more with longer hours and higher stress. We all thought the machines are supposed to help us human but it's actually the other way around. We work tirelessly days and nights in order to keep making those machines better and more advanced, but in return our lives have not seen many meaningful improvements, and even arguably worse than before in some areas. Individually our personal ability has limits and naturally it evolves very slowly, but the power of AI machines is potentially unlimited and growing at an even faster rate than Moore's law. We seem to be collectively working to make machine much better than us while we are remaining relatively the same individually. Are technlogies actually enslaving us?
We keep buying things that don't really serve us much. We have a lot of stuff now but they don't mean much. If something broke, meh we will just get another one. It's just another item and it will get shipped here tomorrow. We didn't have as much in the past but every little thing carried much greater value. Even the most simplest thing could fascinate and brought us joy.
We humans today already operate based on rules and algorithms dictated by the machines. We still don't know how our brains function organically (memory, consciousness, etc...), but in the quest of trying to make AI becoming human-like, we have created AI neural networks to simulate our brain. The danger is that even though we still don't know how our real brain functions, but we have now turned around and claimed that the human brain works in a similar way under the same principles of an AI neural network. We are enforcing AI rules onto ourselves.
This is a dangerous assumption to make simply because AI does not have emotions. Once we begin to operate strictly under these rules and principles that are dictated by AI, we would soon lose the attributes and characteristics of what made us human. Our emotional spectrum may get increasingly shorten.
TV shows and movies are an example as they are a form of story telling that have biggest influences on us at the emotional level. It's no coincidence that "Seinfeld" and "Friends" are still the two best tv shows today. Many movies that are considered as best were also made from a while ago. Despite the most advanced technologies, why is it that today we can't seem to tell stories that bring out the same level of emotional reponse and intensity as before? They all seem to lack the genuity and inspiration that the previous generation once had.
Is it because AI do not understand human emotions so its algorithms cannot accurately factor that into consideration? One can say that today humans are the ones who write those algorithms so maybe we can add in compenents to account for that? But just like the example above, if we don't even understand how our brain works, how can we simulate the machine to accurately reflect us? In the future, machines are supposed to learn and write all the codes by itself without human intervention, what would likely happen then? Would we still retain the ability to even understand those codes? Would it possible that human may slowly evolve into machines? In trying to make those machines becoming like us, we may instead become like machines.
Once any pattern is formed and determined, there are always some people who will attempt to exploit it, and those people are often the ones who would eventually ruin all the good things for everybody else.