@coryfromphilly “Before ending rent control, we must first have built more housing”
> Willingness to build housing is a function of developers’ ability to price housing economically
> Rent control prevents economical pricing
> “Before ending rent control, we must first have ended rent control”
@DraconicIntel@JakeKAllDay@tenobrus To look at this another way, the only technology that is faces any real technical uncertainty technically is the technology that US national security interests depend on.
@DraconicIntel@JakeKAllDay@tenobrus Which tech is speculation? Satellites? Rockets? Data centers? AI?
Starlink sats are far more complex than AI sats.
America’s space program is depending on a far more complex version of Starship than the one required to launch satellites into LEO.
@lumpenspace But if you believe in AI, you still have to buy shares. In all of the labs.
You can’t not spend $3,000 and then watch them go 100x.
You can spend $3,000 and then watch them go to zero.
I’m also skeptical that whether or not something is consciousness should be a matter involving any subjectivity. Surely we would not accept a unified theory of physics which is built on subjective properties. Why should consciousness be any different?
This rules out all but 2).
If you believe consciousness to be emergent, then the individual components of a conscious system need not themselves be individually conscious.
Computer + LLM together can be argued to be conscious even if separately they are not.
LLMs are intelligent, but they clearly aren't conscious?
You could (incredibly slowly) run an LLM by hand by doing the matrix calculations with a pen and paper, would that be conscious? There is zero difference between doing that and doing it on a GPU except its faster.
If one does not accept consciousness as emergent, only two other options exist:
1) Consciousness is a property of some definite aspect of one’s being, which is in principle separable from the non-conscious body
2) Everything in the universe is conscious, down to the subatomic
Mail in voting as a proportion of the vote increased from around 65% in 2018 to 88% in 2022. Meanwhile, overall turnout dropped from 49% to 43%.
We can go farther back but there doesn’t appear to be any correlation between voter turnout and mail-in percent.
Mass mail-in voting results in widespread distrust of the democratic process, for no measurable benefit.
People vote by mail because it is marginally more convenient. That doesn’t imply that in-person voting is unreasonably burdensome. And in fact, voter turn out in CA has decreased as mail-in voting has become more common.
Secondly, employers in CA are required by law to provide time off for voting.
@Chatt_TT@PatrickRuffini That math still doesn’t add up. If they can only do 75k per day, fully staffed, it would have taken 18 days to do 1.3 million.
@somewhatdaft@mwstateofmind@___frye That seems far, far less bad.
Anyone who stored data with Google, Microsoft, etc., essentially free or far below cost for years, and expected it to not be used for whatever monetizable purpose these companies came up with, absolutely deserves to have all of their data used.
Yeah, unfortunately, this desire is incompatible with left-wing (progressive, Democrat) governance. The benches are beds for the homeless. The outdoor lighting is stolen. The walkways are open-air drug dens. The dining is shut down over sanitation.
Why? Because enforcing laws which prevent these abuses of the public is itself considered by the left to be an abuse of privilege.
Left-wing, progressive governance is incompatible with civilization.
@PaulHerzog3@stanfordNYC Ballot counting isn’t inherently slow. We don’t need to figure out ways to make it faster. We just need to not do the things which cause it to be slow. The difference is actually meaningful.