robryk @robryk@qoto.org
I enjoy things around information theory (and data compression), complexity theory (and cryptography), read hard scifi, currently work on weird ML (we'll see how it goes), am somewhat literal minded and have approximate knowledge of random things. I like when statements have truth values, and when things can be described simply (which is not exactly the same as shortly) and yet have interesting properties.
I live in the largest city of Switzerland (and yet have cow and sheep pastures and a swimmable lake within a few hundred meters of my place :)). I speak Polish, English, German, and can understand simple Swiss German and French.
If in doubt, please err on the side of being direct with me. I very much appreciate when people tell me that I'm being inaccurate. I think that satisfying people's curiosity is the most important thing I could be doing (and usually enjoy doing it). I am normally terse in my writing and would appreciate requests to verbosify.
I appreciate it if my grammar or style is corrected (in any of the languages I use here).
Joined Nov 2020
I expect the common understanding of the icon to outlive common familiarity with glass thermometers by at least a decade (just like it did for a floppy the save icon and the movie camera icon).
@_dm what incident are you referring to?
It's important what the company (potentially implicitly) expected of them. After all, you can say the same about every single one of your colleagues and some of them might be your friends.
@MJCarty I wonder whether this will end up being a thing that's recognized by labor law in some form (e.g. like unions).
In my area community centers do something of that sort: there's e.g. one Sunday a month when people can come have breakfast together, or "let's chat in German" evening, though that's mostly aimed at people learning German and people who want to chat while also helping others learn German.
I am also very annoyed at the change from train cars with compartments to compartmentless ones. When I was a teenager I would reasonably often (~10 times a year) take a long distance train (3-8hrs). You'd then get to sit with some random people who got seats in the same compartment and the conversations you'd have were very varied and often interesting. Now that happens to me way less often, normalized to time spent on long-distance trains (local language not being my native probably contributes to that a little) and usually with older people (I'm not sure if it's a sign cultural change, or if it was always that older people were more interested in conversations with strangers).
I think that many people associate anarchism with the things it disavows rather the things it avows. For instance, I don't intuitively associate those behaviours with anarchism, even though I associate anarchism with them.
My oversimplified mental model of how society shapes behaviour of people in it is that there are two significantly different ways it always does so: one applies to people who have reasonable amounts of empathy (even if they are prevented from abiding by it by e.g. terribly circumstances they are in) and the other applies to ones who don't. There are very few latter people, but societies have to somehow deal with them (v. serial harassers at e.g. conferences), and using the same approach for both either doesn't deal with latter well, or makes for an unpleasant society for everyone else.
If we take that assumption, an interesting part of the approach is how to decide which approach to use. This is where often some kind of presentability comes in, and this allows for exploits. Assuming I'm not speaking total bollocks, how would you describe this part in a large anarchist society (large in the meaning of low rate of repeat encounters of same people)?
robryk
boosted
@mark @SmallOther@techhub.social @mcc
It's not only that machines are nondeterministic (after all, positions of all electrons in a relay circuit are not really deterministic in any way, shape, or form), but that the abstractions they present aren't (or are leaky-thus-wrong in a way that exposes the nondeterminism).
The whole area of concurrent data structures is IMO (but I'm biased) a very nice example of eking out as much determinism as you can out of a system that's nondeterministic at the next lower abstraction level. Another similar area are distributed protocols, in particular ones that admit adversaries.
It also struck me at some point that we don't really have reasonable fault-tolerant computing models: we have lots of ways of handling faulty storage, but very little for handling faulty logic. The ones I know of either replicate all of it, or are reifications of some byzantine-tolerant distributed protocol. I know of ~none that are aimed at handling cases of stochastic breakdown as cheaply as possible that are not just heuristics.
Czy podejrzewasz, że faktyczne powody biorą się z niechęci do wywracania swojej sytuacji życiowej do góry nogami, czy z obawy przed ryzykiem?
Na ile te kulty przekłada się na działania? (Nie mam za bardzo skąd mieć do tego intuicji.)
@whitequark Huh, did that use to happen in videos about guns?
Random anecdote that this reminded me of:
In Polish an ID card is called literally "proof of identity". The conversations happened in high school.
A: Do you have the proof?
B: What proof? (Thinking: proof of what theorem?)
A: Well, proof of identity.
B: Which identity?
A: Yours!
A: What is my identity? (Thinking: what was the mathematical identity that someone would associate with me?)
But do they use more electricity when on compared to when off? :)
@mark @SmallOther@techhub.social @mcc
It's not only that machines are nondeterministic (after all, positions of all electrons in a relay circuit are not really deterministic in any way, shape, or form), but that the abstractions they present aren't (or are leaky-thus-wrong in a way that exposes the nondeterminism).
The whole area of concurrent data structures is IMO (but I'm biased) a very nice example of eking out as much determinism as you can out of a system that's nondeterministic at the next lower abstraction level. Another similar area are distributed protocols, in particular ones that admit adversaries.
It also struck me at some point that we don't really have reasonable fault-tolerant computing models: we have lots of ways of handling faulty storage, but very little for handling faulty logic. The ones I know of either replicate all of it, or are reifications of some byzantine-tolerant distributed protocol. I know of ~none that are aimed at handling cases of stochastic breakdown as cheaply as possible that are not just heuristics.
Unless you worked on various nondeterministic or stochastic systems :)
A, i z trochę innej beczki: strzelam, że uważasz, że kohezja społeczna nie jest idealnie zantykorelowana z indywidualizmem, ale jest dość silnie. Ciekaw jestem, jakie społeczeństwa (niekoniecznie etniczne) uważałbyś za ekstremalne przykłady łamania tej antykorelacji (w obie strone).
(Nie rozumiem Ukraińskiego, więc nie wiem, czy moje pytanie nie ma odpowiedzi w wywiadzie; niestety nawet automatyczne tłumaczenie napisów z jakiegoś powodu nie działa.)
Umiem sobie wyobrazić parę powodów do niesolidarnego podejścia:
- obawa przed niesprawiedliwością w poborze (w szczególności, gdy niesolidarne podejście innych wygląda na skuteczne),
- obawa przed brakiem roztropności (bardziej bezpośredniego) dowództwa (np. takie, jak chyba w Polscie rozpowszechnił serial Kawalieria Powietrzna).
Czy wiesz może o jakiś próbach dowiedzenia się o tym, jakie są deklarowane powody tego podejścia? (Albo widzisz jakieś potencjalne powody, których ja nie widzę?)
Apart from the question of whether someone can sustainably cook for themselves, some people won't enjoy cooking (just like some people don't enjoy reading Apollo Program's systems' handbooks). A world where they can't avoid doing that is not more joyful for them.
That aside, I could imagine that Uber Eats itself (as opposed to food delivery in general) might be causing people to enjoy life less by not cooking. If this is what you meant, I would appreciate some verbosification, because I can only vaguely imagine potential mechanisms.
I initially imagined a car with a small catapult that would deliver the food to the doorstep from the street :)
Aaah, die Tür wurde geschlossen tapeziert. (Ich erst dachte, dass er war in offenem Zustand tapeziert worden.)
Ich wundere mich, wieso das einfacher war, als die Tür aus dem Rahmen zu nehmen.
I enjoy things around information theory (and data compression), complexity theory (and cryptography), read hard scifi, currently work on weird ML (we'll see how it goes), am somewhat literal minded and have approximate knowledge of random things. I like when statements have truth values, and when things can be described simply (which is not exactly the same as shortly) and yet have interesting properties.
I live in the largest city of Switzerland (and yet have cow and sheep pastures and a swimmable lake within a few hundred meters of my place :)). I speak Polish, English, German, and can understand simple Swiss German and French.
If in doubt, please err on the side of being direct with me. I very much appreciate when people tell me that I'm being inaccurate. I think that satisfying people's curiosity is the most important thing I could be doing (and usually enjoy doing it). I am normally terse in my writing and would appreciate requests to verbosify.
I appreciate it if my grammar or style is corrected (in any of the languages I use here).
Joined Nov 2020
