Eventually, yes, I think it will be. Not yet though, the tech just isn’t strong enough atm. But an AI is resistant to the emotional toll, burnout and low pay that a real life therapist has to struggle with. The AI therapist doesn’t need a therapist.

Personally though, I think this is going to be one of the first widespread, genuinely revolutionary things LLMs are capable of. Couple more years maybe? It won’t be able to handle complex problems, it’ll have to flag and refer those cases to a doctor. But basic health maintenance is simpler.

tbf, kids content on youtube has been a shitshow for awhile. Here’s a short Folding Ideas piece on it, that’s equal parts surreal, sad and scary:

https://youtu.be/LKp2gikIkD8

I really hope this doesn’t start an actual cult. People don’t need much in the way of an excuse, you know.

Good thing we’re on a service fighting back against algorithmic control in the service of greater profits, where more nuanced takes are not buried by algorithm-served emotional sound-bites.

It’s a legit argument. Though I would counter by saying it was hamas’ goal to further strengthen the right-leaning elements in Israeli society, and it was successful in that regard.

Netanyahu was in a very ugly position, and it was looking like he might finally be succumbing to his own corruption, which would open things up for his leftist opposition. The leftist opposition wanted peace, while Palestinian militants did not want peace, they wanted a continuation of violence. The best way to secure the continuation of violence and halt any peace progress was to empower the Israeli far-right towards ultra-violence, to further inflame the whole region towards a future of war.

So that’s what they did, to wild success.

Regardless, blaming all of Israel is unproductive. The real blame should fall on the Israeli Netanyahu government, and far-right settler movement.

Before Netanyahu took over, the Israeli military was evicting their own settlers, which Netanyahu put a stop to, if memory serves:

https://youtu.be/ZSGjBr_c_QM

Less about self benefit, more about preservation of data accessibility. Potential self-benefit is a bonus, an extra. Two birds, one stone, nice and efficient. How smart people do things.

Simplifies your wardrobe a lot, that’s probably my favorite thing about mono-season climates.

Pandaplomacy is absolutely a thing. That said, much like in the Cold War, it’s good for nuclear superpowers with big armies to have a certain degree of open communication and, if not warm, at least cordial relations. Helps defuse potential problems early, before they turn into news articles.

So, I welcome the move on that basis alone.

On top of that, the move does have symbolic power, as the panda occupies a similar place in China as bald eagles do here in the US. Anything that warms feelings between Chinese and American citizens themselves is probably a good thing.

Very likely. Those are not secure in the long-run either though, hence the need for an overabundance. No single online service should be genuinely fully trusted. You need a lot of duplication for any kind of real future-proofing.

Vice did a lot of very good, and generally in-moderate-depth reporting over the years. Hope an overabundance of people scrape that shit while we still have an opportunity. Once its hosted somewhere safe, you could probably even dump access to it somewhere like … the fediverse.

Something, something, technology indistinguishable from magic, something, education funding, something, something.

Funny the kind of folks that get suspended on Elon’s twitter.

Different fuels do release different amounts of heat when burned, this is true. But, the amount of heat in a fuel, and “temperature” are two different things. Did you not understand my explanation of how that worked?

Memory can get foggy after even a few years, much less 20. Brains are not as pure as we like to think. This is why witness testimony is such weak evidence in a courtroom, where physical evidence like fingerprints are considered much better. People’s memories suck.

edit: So how about this one. If wood fires “burn at a low temperature”, how does the inside of a forest fire get over 1000 C? If wood just burns at a set temp, wouldn’t that be the temp they can reach?

Pick up litter when I come across small amounts of it.

Care to share any of this? Sounds to me like fake meme-ey stuff. Can even post it in the local science community if you want, I’m sure we’d be interested over there.

Depends entirely on the design and structure of your forge. Heat can be added in unlimited quantities, and so long as it cannot escape through any openings or through anything weakly insulating, it will simply accumulate … and accumulate … and accumulate, as you add more and more joules. The temp will get hotter … and hotter … and hotter. What your source of heat is, is irrelevant. This is how the interior of your car gets hotter than the surroundings on a sunny day, despite the source being the same, yes? Containment of the slowly-accumulating heat.

It’s like weight. It doesn’t matter how heavy a hippo is, if we keep adding hippo … after hippo … after hippo to a set of scales, we can eventually reach whatever weight, yes? Accumulation, not individual hippo weight, is what matters. Heat in a forge is no different, assuming your forge contains all the heat produced properly.

And they didn’t, they collapsed starting higher up. Check an unedited video.

An idea needs more than a bunch of content made for it to be genuinely fleshed out. It has to try to address counter-arguments. Like, for instance, how it doesn’t matter what fuel you use to generate heat in an enclosed space. The temperature an oven reaches is not dependent on what fuel you use to heat it, it’s dependent on how well the space insulates and retains heat.

You can melt steel with a wood fire, in an appropriate oven.

The crust has a few tectonically stable regions that have never slid into the mantle. This is where we’ve found rocks that date all the way back to 2-3 billion-ish years. We call them geologic shields.

Our current activities would leave chemical markers in these regions that would be detectable for a very, very long time, and could come from no known natural process.

Otherwise you’re right, everything else eventually slides into the mantle and gets turned back into magma over a long enough timeframe.

Which is why diplomatic tools should be attempted first, then escalation to economic tools. Military deterrence is too big a jump, currently.

I agree, it’s a very big deal. I never said it was nothing and we shouldn’t respond. I said we should respond in kind, as we can.

I merely draw a distinction between these kinds of attacks, and the actual invasions of places like Gaza or Ukraine. Information warfare has a culpable deniability to it, similar to espionage, that makes it inherently harder to tackle.

It’s just not so simple as bomb the people that fuck with us or something like that. That would not fix the problem. It’s trickier.