Why the law of large numbers?
I’d think it’s p-hacking. Meaning if he tried out many different combinations, the chances are high he’d eventually come across some which are only correlated by chance. Here’s a related XKCD:
This article of a dentist testing other dentists gives some more anecdotal evidence: https://www.rd.com/article/how-honest-are-dentists/
In that case it actually makes sense because the main goal is to make an artificial entity appear intelligent to the player. This is not the same as calling all ML algorithms/models AI.
No way this is real. He’d be carrying around dozens of kilograms of digested food with him at this point.
Thanks, I didn’t know that was an option. But these easier ways of blocking can be reversed within seconds, right? I need something that is difficult to undo.
Thanks, I needed that post. I’m in a similar boat. I get addicted to this stuff (YT, lemmy, reddit etc.) easily, and I’ve found that a moderate use is just not possible for me in the long run. It can’t really coexist in my life with leisure activities that require me to sustain my attention for longer, like reading, practicing an instrument, or even just sitting down and listening to a good album intently.
What helps me a bit is putting all kinds of hindrances in place:
But none of that has worked as much as I’d like. It’s a constant struggle and I’m still looking for a better solution.
Doing interesting stuff has somehow in my mind turned into work.
That’s the worst part. Scroll too much and that state becomes your new baseline. Now anything that is less captivating and effortless than that feels difficult.
(*) I’m not sure if subdomain is the correct term here. If anyone knows, please correct me.
I’m kind of dissatisfied with the answers here. As soon as you talk about actually drawing a line in the real world, the distinction between rational and irrational numbers stops making sense. In other words, the distinction between rational and irrational numbers is a concept that describes numbers to an accuracy that is impossible to achieve in real life. So you cannot draw a line with a clearly irrational length, but neither can you draw a line with a clearly rational length. You can only define theoretical mathematical constructs which can then be classified as rational or irrational, if applicable.
More mathematically phrased: in real life, your line to which you assign the length L will always have an inaccuracy of size x>0. But for any real L, the interval (L-x;L+x) contains both an infinite number of rational and an infinite number of irrational numbers. Note that this is independent of how small the value of x is. This is why I said that the accuracy, at which the concept of rational and irrational numbers make sense, is impossible to achieve in real life.
So I think your confusion stems from mixing the lengths we assign to objects in the real world with the lengths we can accurately compute for mathematical objects that we have created in our minds using axioms and definitions.
I love playing this with my cat. Works especially well when you audibly drag your feet and when you move around corners or behind objects a lot. I learned this by watching my cat play with her son. However she only lets me play the prey role and gets aggressive when I do the same to her. Her son also used to let me hunt him a bit, but he disappeared one day :/
I see a lot of hate against the concept of doing one’s own research on the internet and it really bothers me. The problem is not doing one’s own research. The scientists that wrote this paper also did their own research. All scientists (should) do their own research. That’s inherent to science and that’s part of what got humanity this far. The problem is that some people lack the capabilities to properly assess information sources and draw correct conclusions from them. So these people end up with incorrect beliefs. Of course they could just “trust the experts” instead, but how are they supposed to know which experts to trust if they’re not good at assessing sources of information? Finding those experts is in itself a task that requires you to do your own research.
TL;DR: I think this hate on “doing your own research” is unjustified. People believing nonsense is a problem that is inescapable and inherent to humanity.
Epic post
Is this not just a (mildly oversimplified) framing of what psychologists call ego depletion [1]? This appears to be a well-replicated finding. I don’t see any reason to call it “wildly incorrect”.
[1] The strength model of self-control. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2007-18261-013
Edit: After some more research, it looks like the science is inconclusive on ego depletion. So I would not call it “well-replicated”, but also not “wildly incorrect”.
This blog post summarizes the science nicely: https://scopeblog.stanford.edu/2023/10/30/a-conversation-about-the-science-of-willpower/ TL;DR: You can train your willpower. It does act like a limited resource [Edit: Science is inconclusive on this claim]. But most importantly, it is strongly affected by your sleep, nutrition and stress level.
I found that mindfulness meditation was helpful for me. Practically, you can achieve an effect that is similar to having strengthened willpower by organizing your life in such a way that you don’t encounter many temptations in the first place.
You like Lain, rats, and silly catposting?? Do you wanna be frens?