That makes no sense. House price/salary is used to compare payment periods or affordability. The context is important. Share value and GDP are totally different things and there is no direct relationship.
I often have them append to notes, too, but also often ask them to deduplicate those notes, without which they can become quite redundant. Maybe redundancy doesn't matter to the AI because I've got tokens to burn, but it feels like the right thing to do. Particularly because sometimes I read the notes myself.
The study is based on 100 cells from one 74-year-old man. The follow-up study will involve 150 individuals. I hope there's a very wide age range among them. They describe much, maybe all, of the variation as error, but one could imagine some of the variation actually serving a useful purpose and therefore existing even in young people.
Isn't the effect largely an age + lifestyle effect? Mutations increase as one ages, and things like smoking increase mutations (as the Nature write-up mentions).
Naughty Dog used Racket and their own in house lisp (prior to that) to write their games.
Could be mistaken but IIRC Jak and Daxter was the first console game to have a fully streaming world and they achieved it using a technique inspired by their hot reloading dev setups
Depression, lack of motivation, are functional. They kick in when you don't think your prospects are good, prompting you to step back and think. If you were sufficiently convinced grinding LeetCode was a good career move, you would be motivated. The fact that you're not suggests you should do some research rather than plowing ahead. What do employers really care about? What's the best way to convince them you've got it? Where do you fit in?
> If you were sufficiently convinced grinding LeetCode was a good career move, you would be motivated.
Motivation certainly doesn't work like that in my brain. Consistency in pursuing goals I know on paper are the right choice despite lack of motivation is the only way I've achieved anything.
If you can wed career goals with dopamine, that's wonderful! But I suspect you're extremely lucky.
It takes some competitiveness, and I'm not sure the level of neuroticism it brings (me) is worth it, but "Who are these assholes and what's so special about them" works for me most the time :D
Then there's "Oh jesus how terrifying and embarrassing would it be to not have a great answer" coupled with "The people I idolize the most work in theoretical CS".
It does if you're connected. I've seen many incompetent and under-skilled people given high-ranking positions in tech companies simply because they knew someone.
But why does that feel like anything? I could write a program that concurrently processes its visual input and its internal model. I don't think it would be conscious, unless everything in the universe is conscious (a possibility I can't, admittedly, discount).
More of "because you are a continuous chemical reaction that started 4 billion years ago". A bunch of legacy crap gets left around from the time before higher order thought when the brain - muscle interactivity was just based on feelings.
If we had all those animals, especially those around the time of the cambrian explosion to experiment on as they developed it would probably make more sense in the 'but it does' department. This is also why your math teacher wants you to show your work.
Consciousness is an attention mechanism. That inward regard, evaluating how the self reacts to the world, is attention being payed to the body's feelings. The outward regard then maps those feelings on to local space. Consciousness is watching your feelings as a kind of HUD on the world. It correlates feels to things.
Just wait till you hear Geoffrey Hinton’s “little pink elephants” routine; it will all make sense then (it won’t). The mystery is almost rivaled by that other mystery of why some of us fail to be mystified.
Orchestrated objective reduction or just an emerging proeprty of:
Our 86 billion neurons, every single one deafeningly
complex molecular machine with hundred million of hundreds of different receptor types, monoaminoxidae, (reuptake)transporters, connections to other neurons.
Among others, this is a big reason I want effect systems to gain more attention. After having seen them, the idea that in most languages, the only option is that any function can do anything without keeping track of what it affects in its type signature is bonkers to me.
reply