I think we've entered an era where this isn't worth the mental toll anymore. Especially as LLMs ramp up in adoption, the internet is becoming one giant demoralising psyop. I'm more interested in filtering and minimizing the impact rather than trying to engage with it.
Not yet, but I'm curious if that would be a good improvement. Would it really benefit you to gray out one subreddit, and not the rest? Maybe it'd be better to add exceptions instead?
The reality is that the market has inefficiencies like human emotion and bot/algorithmic trading which absolutely can be exploited by AI. You just need to train an AI to recognize the inefficiencies, which is exactly what neural networks excel at.
I suppose so, if you look at the exacerbation of economic inequality, starvation (+15 million worldwide), and deaths of despair caused by the lockdowns and associated interventions. Seemingly no one minds that.
2. Yeah but, it's not a superconductor, it's just diamagnetic.
3. Yeah but, theoretically maybe, but not practically.
4. Yeah but, it's just a warmer superconductor, not room temperature.
I don't know if my sensibilities are "bayesian" or something, but while the naysayers are totally correct, their predictions are not where the trend is heading. This thing is consistently defying expectations and gradually becoming more "important" as more information comes out.
I believe if the Q-Centre team say it's room-temperature SC, then given the evidence so far I expect to get closer to that conclusion over time. If it fails, then I think it'll fail for very good reasons, not simple error or incompetence. At this point, fraud is totally ruled out.
If you want to benefit from dubious and/or fake research, you'll have to be a lot more subtle about it.
Announcing you just found the holy grail will get you all the attention in the world, attention you don't want if you just forged the paper to advance your career.
There was a period where people were claiming that critical theory is being pushed in schools, while school board members refuted the claim as nonsense. Then it became clear that the students aren't being taught critical theory at all, but are being subjected to critical pedagogy - ie. teaching methods influenced by critical theory.
What? Especially ca. 2005 all the coaches I knew hated Ks. The influence was often from the judges who were not teachers, but former policy debate kids now at university.