corethree

5 ms·

1.
by corethree 3y ago
This is a rarity. Many interviewers are so biased and lack nuance that they literally just go with whether or not the person passed the question.
2.
by corethree 3y ago
No way. The people at the forefront of AI, most of them will have a much harder time learning quantum physics. Yes ML is hard but it's nowhere near QE, theoretical math or physics. The reason is simply because ML is incomplete and thus
3.
by corethree 3y ago
And You're fucking rude. What the hell is up with that Wild u turn there into hostility. You need to fucking tone your shit down. This is causal conversation not a scientifically rigorous paper making bold claims. That comparison with
4.
by corethree 3y ago
Just thought I reference this: 1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. 2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First La
5.
by corethree 3y ago
I don't think he undertands people are more and more hating CA, both inside and outside of the state.
6.
by corethree 3y ago
Same reason why Tesla moved and why tons of people are moving out of CA. There's a huge benefit. Also don't think that this workforce is exclusive to CA. AI is easy to learn, it's not quantum physics.
7.
by corethree 3y ago
Of course it's nicer to give everyone a humane job. It's not about what's nicer. It's about reality. There's simply not enough jobs to go around if there are no bullshit jobs. Your statement here doesn't make s
8.
by corethree 3y ago
If you want to create a world where there's no bullshit jobs at all then you'd be creating a world where millions are unemployed. We are rapidly heading in this direction with automation. AI is beginning to fulfill the final step
9.
by corethree 3y ago
Does anyone know what I have to learn to "know" about this theory? Is it control theory and classical mechanics?
10.
by corethree 3y ago
Is there a way to model this theoretically? Or is it always trial and error? I mean I realize you have to test the thing for "bugs" just wondering if a theory to perfectly model it is even possible.
11.
by corethree 3y ago
I disagree. The colloquial understanding for logic is technical. OP is using the term incorrectly and in a strange way. I understand that most of us can still 'understand' his point but that does not mean he's using the term
12.
by corethree 3y ago
I'm kidding a bit here. My post is actually agreeing with the parent poster but in a sort of roundabout deceptive way of appearing to disagree. It got flagged and several downvotes. Likely from saying that css is terrible. But I mean t
13.
by corethree 3y ago
>FWIW, I'm amused because I recognize your behavior as that of someone quite young. I acted similar ways 20 years ago and now I think it's just kind of funny to see in other people. If you are actually amused then you're a
14.
by corethree 3y ago
Right. So that's my point. Css is logical. The point made by the article has no point. A claim that css is terrible, has a point.
15.
by corethree 3y ago
Logical is orthogonal to terrible. Literally by definition anything designed in a computer must follow logic.
16.
by corethree 3y ago
[flagged]
17.
by corethree 3y ago
You called me adorable, you laugh in my face and make dismissive comments. These words are stated by you to start a fucking war. Any reasonable person can see this. And your counterpoint isn't even charitable. Just a statement of &quot
18.
by corethree 3y ago
>So what? I said you were perpetuating a myth and you were. It still not 'your' thread, what kind of childish nonsense is that? Please do not say things like that here. It is "my" thread. I opened the topic for discus
19.
by corethree 3y ago
But you're talking shit about me under my thread which my comment is the parent to my face. You're starting shit. I've literally told you I don't appreciate your attitude and you're still starting shit. I have done
20.
by corethree 3y ago
Please don't respond to my thread nor impolitely reference me or accuse me of things if you're going to post things that aren't for me. I already stated this conversation is over. Walk away now. Do not respond me.
21.
by corethree 3y ago
Thank you for posting sources, you should have done this in the beginning. Unfortunately I don't like your attitude nor do I care about this topic enough to follow through. No offense. As a result I will not be following your sources a
22.
by corethree 3y ago
Well no you're the one spreading the myth. Stop. Thanks. Also being quite rude and dismissive as well. No thanks.
23.
by corethree 3y ago
Or your statement is a myth and you're one of the sources.
24.
by corethree 3y ago
https://www.dogster.com/lifestyle/are-pigs-smarter-than-dogs
25.
by corethree 3y ago
It's like Himalayan sea salt. It's just marketing jargon.
26.
by corethree 3y ago
Lots of umami. Especially the baby ones that still have fur. I get hungry just thinking about it. The adults get too muscular from all the torpedoing through the water.
27.
by corethree 3y ago
>My gratitude knows no bounds. If I wasn't even close to being right you wouldn't even respond. It's the fact that I'm right that makes you respond. I'm right and you can't face it. That's all.
28.
by corethree 3y ago
That's the practicality for why thing are the way they are. My argument is about starting up a baby penguin slaughterhouse in the north pole right now and how much activist resistance you will get versus a crocodile meat slaughter hous
29.
by corethree 3y ago
It's ok. It can be like wagyu. Imported fresh baby penguin meat straight from the north pole.
30.
by corethree 3y ago
Smarter then dogs. The criteria for edibility is mainly ugliness vs. Cuteness. Octopuses are recently getting more media attention with that movie about the diver that made friends with one so they are getting cuter. Try farm raising and ea

More ›