2:32 AM
@JMac lol how do you know thats not the world we're already living in? just wanted to share this recent excellent/ piercing analysis by Wolff with someone, ideas on my mind for many yrs :) _ Why capitalism is in constant conflict with democracy_ alternet.org/2020/08/…

@vzn Oh I'm well aware that this already happens. But if you follow the context of the conversation, I don't think it would have done much good to mention that. It would have likely derailed the more obvious point. Someone was advocating for giving the wealthy more literal votes, I figure it's best to point out why that is clearly wrong before talking about the current system.

2:59 AM
@JMac ok scanning back thru conversation, apropos of ?, jinglebells refers to rich "casting more votes on what society values". not sure what he meant by that. so not sure what people are actually talking about but it all defn falls into capitalism vs democracy etc...! a complex topic! do remember vividly occupy 2013 and am amazed it seems like it hasnt gone much further in 7yr! and the article seems to reveal why...as for the "current system," many argue its near oligarchy + plutocracy.

It's extremely complicated, just like it's complicated to figure out why the system is like it is and the mechanisms that make it resistant to change. It was much easier to address the issue of giving more votes based on wealth, so I'd rather tackle that discussion lol

1 hour later…
4:13 AM
@JMac it seems that our system may already give a kind of strong/ deep political power to those with (lots of) money, and votes are just another facet, maybe increasingly token/ symbolic/ weak in comparison. it didnt start out that way, but its evolved. the mass media increasingly plays a outsize role that was unimaginable in the founders era.

2 hours later…
6:12 AM
2

Yesterday I was awarded the Talkative badge on the main site for one message being starred out of ten message posted in chat. According to me, chat is same for main as well as meta site. So, why I didn't receive the badge here, on meta?

7:04 AM
I feel I am better at hearing eavesdrops in the real world than reading others' conversations in the virtual world.

2 hours later…
8:47 AM
I have long wondered what kind of doctor to see for not being able to sleep well.

I thought it was an excellent book.

I had the problem of not being able to sleep well for long, but thought seeing a doctor isn't a good idea because they could just prescribe some sleeping pills to me and in the first place, I didn't know what kind of doctor to see.
I definitely know what causes my sleeping problem - it's an issue which worried me and if it was solved I could sleep well but it just couldn't be solved because someone who can help me kept delaying it.

9:25 AM
@JohnRennie, sir. Can you please clear a doubt?

@Korra hi :-)

10:21 AM
I posted a maths question
And the answer isn't really clear to me
@JohnRennie, can you help with that?
Is it okay if I share the question here?

You can post it, though I probably can't answer a maths question.

It's integration related
@JohnRennie gimme a minute
2

This is a first order differential equation: $$\frac{df_1}{dx} + \frac{(f_1)^2}{h^2} - \frac{2m}{h^2} \lambda \delta(x-pa)=-\frac{2mE_1}{h^2}$$ Where, h, $\lambda$ and $E_1$ are constants and and pa lies in [0,a] as 0<p<1 . I have not been taught how to handle differential equations with a Dir...

This is the question I am talking about

10:44 AM
by jinglebells

1 hour later…
11:45 AM
I'm thinking of running some kind of bounty scheme for our upcoming anniversay, like letting people vote on the "best" or "most underrated" answer of every year and then awarding a bounty to the winning answer, but I'm not sure what the best criterion would be. Any thoughts?

user434058
12:42 PM
@ACuriousMind Good idea! I might also want to participate in bountying :-) I no longer care about rep ;-P

@FakeMod The most ambitious version I'm currently thinking about would consist of a total of 9000 points of rep offered, that's more than you can provide :P But I'm mostly wondering what would be good criteria that don't just end up bountying the top-voted posts of the year

user434058
@ACuriousMind Why don't you answer the Meta question regarding it? That way, this plan of yours will be able to reach more eyes and you might as well get some rep contributors, following you and doing the kind of bountying you intend to do?

user434058
@ACuriousMind Bountying underrated posts should be the only kind of award-ish bountying, I suppose. Since highly upvoted HNQ answers, often get their share of rep.

user434058
@ACuriousMind Yeah, but I could definitely contribut my 2 cents rep.

@FakeMod I'll answer the question when I've got a clearer idea of how I'd want to do this
currently it's just a vague idea

user434058
12:54 PM
@ACuriousMind You could even set up a submission question, where people could submit the answers which they regard as good, yet unnoticed. You could then choose from them.

user434058
(Unrelated to your idea) We could also do an AMA, if anyone wants to do an AMA.

user434058
Though, I don't think that is really an answer worthy thing, so I have not yet talked about it in the Meta post.

user434058
We could have me doing the AMA (:P), but neither do I have anything worth knowing about me, nor do I expect anyone to be interested in knowing/asking me :P

user434058
What do you guys think about it?

user434058
(Not about me doing the AMA, but about any such AMA in general)

12:59 PM
we did that a while back, but we sorta ran out of people interested in being interviewed
look for "AMA" on meta

user434058
FWIW, Emilio's suggestion of an online video meeting seems far fetched to me. I mean, who's going to get invited. I don't think we can hold a constructive video meeting with about 100 PSE members. And of it's only going to be a few selected members, then announcing it explicitly sounds a bit "not-nice" to those folks which are not invited.

user434058
@ACuriousMind I know that. That's why I thought it would be something which we haven't done in a while, and at the same time, we have the necessary experience to make it happen.

user434058
@ACuriousMind Yup. Have seen 'em.

user434058
Also, time zone might be a problem as well.

user434058
Anyways, I gotta go. POOF!

user434058
1:04 PM
::vanishes::

user434058
2:34 PM
Is this comment correct?

user434058
Your measuring device will, itself, cause the wavefunction to collapse when it measures the wavefunction. — FakeMod 3 mins ago

@FakeMod 1. Please don't leave comments that attempt to answer the question. 2. It is correct within most interpretations that have collapse, but flippiefanus' answer is more correct - without choosing an interpretation, you cannot say anything reliable about "collapse".

user434058
@ACuriousMind Alright! Thanks!

0

Previously, whenever I asked a question, there used to be a 'Related' tag on the right side. It used to display links to a lot of related posts. Now, I cannot see the tag 'Related' anymore. It was useful to track the related posts. Has there been a recent change on the site regarding this or is i...

2:58 PM
Wow!

@Yuvraj Whats crazy is that it won't even produce usable power, it's basically all for testing large scale reactors.

3:29 PM
@ACuriousMind Didn't we used to have something like "most underrated answer of the year"-type question on meta?

@ZeroTheHero Daniel Sank ran a contest for 2016, cf. physics.meta.stackexchange.com/q/9423/50583, but I don't think we did that for any other year
but good catch, I completely forget about that one

4:03 PM
@ACuriousMind Play any good board games recently?

Nah, not much board gaming going on currently

2 hours later…
user434058
6:09 PM

6:20 PM
@FakeMod Sir please delete the answer and take necessary action against the user .The 'answer' was given in some other language and is highly offensive and inappropriate.

user434058
@TonyStark I know, but I don't have the priviledges to do so.

@FakeMod No, just flag as rude/abusive.

user434058
@ACuriousMind Did that as well.

Editing and using "not an answer" just lets it live unnecessarily long, while enough r/a flags will delete it without needing a completed review or mod intervention
@FakeMod No, you flagged it as "not an answer".
If every flag on that post had been a r/a flag (instead of 2 naa flags), it would have been deleted before I even got to it

user434058
@ACuriousMind True, but the original answer was egregiously bad. Might be able to resist myself in milder cases. Thanks.

user434058
6:24 PM
@ACuriousMind :D Once I edited it, I knew that flagging it as rude and abusive might lead to invalidation of the fag, so I thoughtof flagging according to the revised version.

...and that's exactly why you shouldn't edit

user434058
@ACuriousMind O_o I will keep that in mind. Thanks!

Validated r/a flags delete the post and carry a -100 rep penalty to the author that normal naa flags do not.

@ACuriousMind In defense of people flagging NAA (though not in defense of the edit), I wouldn't have flagged it as r/a because I have no idea if that was abusive or just the wrong language.

@JMac That would've been fine (although simply googling the first word there would have made it pretty clear it was r/a)

user434058
6:27 PM
@ACuriousMind Sure, I don't really have any problems in seeing a few expletives, but I just worry that many other interested unregistered/existing folks might see that answer and change their mind/opinion about PSE.

user434058
@ACuriousMind lol

physics.stackexchange.com/review/suggested-edits/310563 lol this proposed edit. The comment is "Spelling mistalr" and the edit removes half the post just to introduce the word "klectrons". Anonymous user must have been pretty bored.

user434058
@JMac I really thought that it gotta be a review audit, or else, who in the hell does that? :P

user434058
But we got no review audits, so yeah crazies do exist

@FakeMod The mean lifetime of such posts is under 10 mins, and the r/a flags also automatically downvote it. There's really very little benefit to editing them.

6:32 PM
@FakeMod People try to deface posts like this fairly often I find. I'm not sure why exactly, but it;s not totally uncommon, especially from anonymous users.

user434058
@ACuriousMind True! Do we guys use SmokeDetector?

user434058
@JMac yeah, they always try and see how hard it is to mess up the site :P

@FakeMod There is nothing to "use" really, but yes, SD flaggers are active on our site

user434058
This isn't Wikipedia, so you cannot just edit however you want.

user434058
@ACuriousMind great!

6:33 PM
@FakeMod I think there's just people online who see an "edit" button and can't resist the urge to deface things.

user434058
@JMac I think curiosity is a stronger driving factor. They are curious to see whether they can just, out of nowhere, edit however they want to.

We're an extremely minor spam target though, there isn't much stuff SD catches. We're not attractive for the people who spam SO, and we don't have many keywords that would attract other kinds of spammers (in contrast to e.g. rpg.SE, where the frequent use of words like "spell" attracts a surprising amount of spam offering death or love spells)

user434058
BTW, Arqade.SE has a few questions with extremely contextless and funny questions :D

6:53 PM
@JMac Long time no chat

@BioPhysicist IKR. I've been a lot less active on SE lately.

Same. Although today I have been doing more for some reason

I've been a bit more active in chat, but definitely not as much as I was a few months ago.

On a related note, there haven't been any ranting meta posts in a while. I see a correlation here lol

Yeah we really need someone to accuse the site of being a conspiracy so that I can get wrapped up in more pointless rambling. The ratio of rational discussion to irrational discussion on meta is getting way too high
Not enough room to feel unnecessary outrage when people are just asking reasonable questions and giving answers I agree with :(

7:04 PM
Yeah, I need more outrage. Or accusations against me personally. Those were the best times.

user434058
Yeah, right folks! Even I am bored with Meta. Always go there in the hope of some popcorn worthy drama, just to find some civil discussions. You know what? Let's just downvote some really bad questions to oblivion, leave snarky condescending comments and perpetrate a grand closure followed by a public deletion of such questions to enrage the OP to start ranting on Meta.

Hello humans

@FakeMod Stop stalking other users, if you're concerned about something, raise a flag.
This chat isn't a pillory you can just dump every questionable behaviour you find into

user434058
@ACuriousMind What!?! I wasn't stalking and this isn't bad enough to flag... Nvm, I drop it.

@JingleBells hello

7:18 PM
How is everyone's day going?

user434058
@ACuriousMind True, but it was about the site. Do you see the stars on those chats, do you want other folks to believe that PSE is cruel? (Delete this if you want to, it is okay =))

We can't control what other people think And certainly I do not expect all people to like PSE

People can think what they want, if someone doesn't like PSE they can just say so

I can see how certain people would perceive PSE as cruel

I like Puget Sound Energy

user434058
7:20 PM
@BioPhysicist But you cannot just stay mum when others are blatantly defaming you, can you?

PSE is not a person, defamation doesn't apply here

@FakeMod In my direct experience, calling them out on that behaviour doesn't help anyways

user434058
@Charlie Yeah, but coercing others into doing the same doesn't feel right...

I don't take myself seriously enough to care if others deface me

@FakeMod There's lots of beliefs I don't want other people to hold, that doesn't mean I'm concerned if they're uttering them out of my sight. Users are free to dislike the way we handle moderation here, if I had an issue with that I'd have given up on the position long ago.

user434058
7:21 PM
@Charlie Heh! You got me!

PSE is an electrical bill company
they manufacture electrical bills

That isn't really something we have control over though. The most that can be done is enforcing the rules consistently so that at worst people can dislike the rules themselves.

user434058
Yeah, I was a bit too over-reacting. It's all because of the sudden desire to stir up drama, damn! :P

user434058
@Charlie Good statement there, +1.

@JingleBells Typically you can't get away with manufacturing electricity bills unless you're also providing electricity. I'm pretty sure the PSE you're talking about does both

user434058
7:25 PM
PSE==Power Sirkit Electric?

google PSE and it's the first thing that pops

user434058
Oh, now your "puget" comment makes sense....

:55252046 Honestly, it's hard to tell with you sometimes, but my response was also rather tongue-in-cheek.

7:59 PM
@JMac I apologize for my statement. For what it's worth, I didn't know that you were being sarcastic as well and I've been watching a lot of Ben Shapiro videos lately.
Still, I don't understand why banning me for 30 minutes was necessary considering the fact that I would have apologized right after I realized I'm being a d*ck.

Shapiro is turning you to the dark side of the force

@JingleBells It's not so much "necessary" as simply the standard consequence of a valid r/a flag on a chat message. Don't want to be suspended? Don't be rude.

@ACuriousMind fair enough

@ACuriousMind lol, more like, 100 years later, humans got killed by AI which ate the sun and expanded beyond known horizons.

8:06 PM
What.

it's open to imagination
@ACuriousMind I mean, the sun probably won't survive to dim down nor would humans stay here until the sum dims down.
Who wants to debate gun control or abortion? I watched a few videos and now I feel like a debating god

I doubt this is the place to debate polarising topics like that
Again, there are literally a million places online you can endlessly debate these things

ya, discord

sure

I mean, we do talk about everything here, but usually we don't debate things just for the sake of debating them.

8:16 PM
I don't debate for the sake of debating. I debate to learn about the thing/issue.

One can have a conversation about a topic without turning it into the antagonistic structure of a debate.

Probably better word would be "discuss" :P

I like discussions

Okay, let's discuss gun control.

If you're coming off the back of a bunch of Ben Shapiro videos I slightly doubt how constructive the discussion would be lol

8:17 PM
A few videos is a start, but you only ever get a good taste of both sides when you get into those discussioins

@Charlie I do not.

@ACuriousMind sure, I should have put it that way

Ok jinglebells what's your take on gun control and we'll discuss it if you want

8:18 PM
I don't want to be DESTROYED by cold hard FACTS and LOGIC™

my take on gun control is (opposite of ben shapiro and many other people) that guns should be banned.

All guns for any reason?

ok can you provide some details, are there any allowable circumstances under which people can own weapons?

Yes. Removing guns would reduce shootings, wouldn't it?

Sure, but a lower number of guns doesn't necessarily lead to lower homicide rate, just less killings with guns

8:20 PM
Plus people would probably still be able to get their hands on guns

fwiw my position is not pro-gun, but I'll just speak contrary to whatever you're saying

No we are discussing, not debating :P

If you literally removed all the guns from somewhere, somehow, sure. If you just made guns illegal, especially somewhere like US where they are already very common, it doesn't necessarily solve the problem, and the people who argue it might make it worse actually have a decent point on that topic, IMO

The United States is so saturated with guns that it would probably have to be handled differently to the average country, sure
I don't live in the US though I'm from the UK

If people stopped selling guns, this would reduce total people killed, wouldn't it?

8:21 PM
Just remove the gun source file from the simulation folder

Depends, if you want to kill someone badly enough, not having access to a gun doesn't prevent you from doing it

@JingleBells Some would argue that allowing people to protect themselves with guns makes them less susceptible to being attacked

Not trying to put myself on some kind of watchlist but I can think of lots of ways to kill someone that don't involve a gun

I'm from Canada, where guns aren't really a big issue, and my province in particular doesn't exactly have huge metropolitan areas, so we don't have a ton of gun violence. Yet we still managed to have the deadliest mass shooting in Canada in a very rural part of my province this year.

Isn't it harder to kill 100 people with a knife than 100 people with a gun?

8:23 PM
@Charlie studying physics can be kinda useful for that :P

Depends on the time frame I suppose

Now that is a valid point, reducing the number of shootings isn't necessarily going to reduce the homicide rate, but reducing the number of mass shootings might be a desirable outcome

@ACuriousMind reminds me of a kid who asked if i could create a black hole, since i'm a "physicist"
we do have superpowers

@ACuriousMind My physics skills are bad enough that I would probably end up just being a mild nuisance to society rather than a supervillain if I went down that route :P

If guns get banned, I wouldn't need a gun to protect myself since no one will be shooting at me. It will be a knife fight rather than a gun fight lol

8:25 PM
@JingleBells Banning guns doesn't stop them from existing illegally though

^ That is also a fair point. In the UK I don't feel compelled to arm myself because I know other people aren't armed to the teeth

But practically you would need to remove guns entirely, not just ban them
You would need to actually take guns away from people who already have them

Yes, stop selling guns.

@JingleBells Or someone can poison you, or run you over on the street with a car. The set of possible killing methods is not "guns" and "knives".

@BioPhysicist And that's tough, because those guys have guns!

8:27 PM
No see. First you use bigger guns to take away the smaller guns
Then you use all of the small guns you took to take away the big guns

I will use the guns to destroy the guns.

The solution you choose depends on what you're trying to acomplish. Are you trying to prevent all gun deaths or lower the risk of mass shootings?

I'm trying to reduce the total amounts of mass shootings.

Eventually you bring in nukes to take out all the bigger guns, and then you build a death-star to take out the nukes

Plus one could argue there are other ways to prevent mas shootings than take away guns
Obviously not all people who own guns engage in mass shootings

8:28 PM
Then you'd need to loot at what variables increase the mass shooting rate.

Everything very much depends on what you think the causal chain is that leads to shootings, and what point of the chain you think you can best disrupt

I mean if you are going to completely disregard what is being discussed that is fine :)

it's really hard to read, answer and keep track of everyone's messages.

welcome to the internet :P

8:30 PM
The argument that "if someone wants to get a gun they will" is a bit of a blanket statement. There may not be much you can do about carefully planned and targetted shootings without seriously restricting access to guns but maybe there is a point at which you start getting diminishing returns by removing weapons
To my knowledge Australia had reasonable success with the weapons amnesties they did
After the Port Arthur massacre

I believe that if people stopped selling guns, after some time, the system would clear out. I believe only the military and police should have guns. That would make me more comfortable to not have a gun to protect myself since I know the chances of someone else coming at me with a gun are less. I believe this would also reduce mass shootings.

@JingleBells Guns don't really go bad with age though

Then I (at least mostly) agree with you JingleBells

Having a gun to protect yourself from people attacking you with guns isn't the only reason people have guns

@Charlie yay

8:33 PM
You seem to want complete restriction on guns which I wouldn't necessarily go so far on
But the gun situation in America is absolutely absurd and I wouldn't want it in the UK

In an ideal world, I could see the case for only giving guns to police and military having some merit; but in practice that isn't even really feasible

Sure, maybe people with criminal records or psyche stuff shouldn't be able to get guns

Felons already can't have guns in the US legally. That doesn't mean that felons don't get guns.

There are things in the US like the gun show loophole.
Although maybe that's been addressed somewhat

@Charlie what are you doing in the UK?

8:36 PM
Again the US is different to other countries because the situation has gotten so out of hand
@JingleBells What do you mean?

@Charlie What do you do? Do you work, do you study? How old r u?

I am 23 and I study

@JingleBells Ah, but who controls the systems that determine "criminal records" and "psyche stuff"? Especially psychological "illnesses" have a long history of being instrumentalized against already otherwise marginalized groups.

Just ask people when they get the gun: "Are you going to shoot people with this gun?"

@BioPhysicist exactly...
it's so obvious lol
we can make an AI to detect if the person is lying or not

8:38 PM
There's enough of a struggle getting people to trust the opinions of scientists let alone an AI

@JingleBells Have you read any of the recent stuff on AI learning the biases of the system that produced their training data?

All we need to do is advance our understanding of the mind by a few centuries and we're set!

@ACuriousMind no, could you please explain

"The mind" is just a construct.

AI, at the very least the kind of trained AI we currently are pursuing, is extremely susceptible to what you give it as its training set

8:40 PM
Do you believe in free will @BioPhysicist?

You make a new AI to check that no bias was in the original training data

@BioPhysicist Gun violence is just a construct of society!

And then you make AI to check if that has any bias
@Charlie Sorry, just being silly haha. But I suppose so.

@ACuriousMind So?

There was e.g. a "depixelisation" algorithm that was supposed to reconstruct a face from a pixelated version of it, but its training set mostly included white Europeans so it turned everything into while Europeans.
So if you try to train an AI on a set of "liars" and "truthtellers" but you - accidentally or otherwise - have some other characteristic except "lying" in there that the liars share more than the truthtellers, you get an AI that "detects liars" but really just discriminates against people on the basis of that other characteristic.

8:43 PM
What are people's thoughts on free will? I had this conversation with someone the other dayt

@Charlie free will is as an illusion

@Charlie I think free will is an incoherent concept. What is the difference between a world where I have free will and one where I don't?

@ACuriousMind Hmm. I'm still struggling to understand :\

I think we don't know enough about how consciousness, the mind, etc. works to really say anything about it
Certainly we all feel like we are making our own choices

@ACuriousMind I think the important different would be how you view other people, not necessarily yourself

8:45 PM
I feel like it's kinda irrelevant. We have the "illusion" of free will regardless, so to me I don't see why it matters if it's actually free or not

Well for instance whether people have free will or not determines to what extend a person can "help themselves" or not

@Charlie I don't mean the difference between a world where I believe in "free will" and one where I don't. I mean the difference between a world where I have it and one where I don't.
Counterfactuals such as "In the world with free will you could have done something else" are not observable differences.

@ACuriousMind Oh in that case I have no idea

@Charlie So what does it mean to have "free will" if you cannot explain how to distinguish a world where it exists from one where it doesn't?

@ACuriousMind At least to me it would be a matter of determinism in a person's actions, I couldn't outline a mechanism by which it works though. But maybe that's the point you're making

8:48 PM
So as in if we somehow found out free will doesn't exist then that gives good reason to excuse other people's actions since they had no control?

@Charlie One way I look at it is that we either have free will, and thus can choose our actions and have responsibility for them; or there's no free will, and thus our actions and the way others respond to them is completely out of our control so why would it matter

@ACuriousMind Could you please give me more details regarding the AI thing, it's intersting.

@JingleBells Just google phrases around "AI" and "bias", there's plenty of popular and scientific articles about it on the net

They call it "bAIs"

@ACuriousMind Or actually I see what you were saying here now. But I'm not necessarily proposing a way to measure it or explain how it works

8:50 PM
@BioPhysicist 30 day chat ban for terrible puns.

Ugh not again

@Charlie Yes, that's what I mean by it being an incoherent concept - if it is supposedly so important to determine whether it exists or not, why doesn't its existence make any observable difference?

I suppose if it did exist one would need to determine where along in biology it stops existing. I would think single cells do not have free will. So then how do a collection of cells eventually give rise to fee will?
Or perhaps if there is free will there isn't a way to explain it. It is something endowed from a greater power / the simulation

@JMac This is pretty much what I would say, my follow up is usually that I have to live my life as if I am in control of my actions, regardless of whether I believe other people also are.

@Charlie Could you live your life as if you were not in control of your actions if you tried?

8:56 PM
sry had to get the dog in I'm back now

If there was no free will, sure :P

Ah, so the dog controls your actions, got it

oof

In a lot of ways that's true

I wonder if Jingle Bells will be back to talk about abortion :P

8:57 PM
@ACuriousMind Also this is a good point I hadn't really given enough thought to, I'd have to think about it

@ACuriousMind Yeah that's basically where I always wind up. The freewill debate seems practically useless. The only thing I feel could effect me is that if freewill is an illusion, and that illusion could be broken; but then if the illusion broke it's not even clear what that would mean for my consciousness.

Sounds like a good premise for a science fiction novel
Although the other way
free will doesn't exist until one person found a way to get it
Of course, since free will didn't exist it was inevitable
The game was rigged from the beginning
Although I guess no free will doesn't mean the outcome is determined

@JMac I think that the question of "free will" arises only because we usually are first brought up with all sorts of dualist stories (i.e. those that consider it obvious that "mind" and "body" are qualitatively different things) and are then confronted with the monist world view of the natural sciences, where there are just very complicated "bodies".

One of my favourite recent fantasy trilogies (Licanius trilogy) has the main conflict revolving around characters reconciling the ideas of freewill, fate and predestination paradoxes. The author definitely added a lot of religious undertones to it that I wasn't so fond of; but the philosophical problems behind it led to a pretty cool motivation for the villains.

You do realize there are 4 more Harry Potter books, right?

9:02 PM
This produces a cognitive dissonance that we have to try to resolve if we start thinking about it, and if you're not willing to let go of dualism but also not willing to reject the scientific monism outright you start tieing yourself in knots about concepts of "free will" that let you believe the two are compatible

Ah you edited in the trilogy lol

@BioPhysicist Yeah I figured it was better to actually give the name instead of just a vague reference. That was a good joke though

I don't think Harry Potter really wrestles with those ideas anyway
Other than a prophecy I suppose
I haven't read the books in a while though
So maybe I am forgetting something

I never really got into it. I know a lot of the major plot points just from hearing about them; but I think I only read the first two books and only watched the first three movies.

I read all of the books only right as the last two movies were coming out after seeing all of the previous movies. So the final book was definitely the best experience haha. But they obviously didn't impact me as much as they did for others

9:06 PM
There was a pretty nice plot twist (that you could see coming, but it wasn't blatantly telegraphed by anything) around prophecies in the original Mistborn trilogy that I won't spoil here.
@JMac HP's appeal is definitely strongest if you were about Harry's age when the first came out
The books are very much designed - in tone and content - to be read by someone growing up along with them

A series I read in my preteen - teen years (not exactly sure when) that I am surprised never got popular was a book series by Suzanne Collins before the Hunger Games was a thing

@ACuriousMind I had the final mistborn twist spoiled for me before I even started the series, but I still really enjoyed how everything played out

oof

Licanius books 1 and 2 had similar twists; but book three was fairly obvious where it was going, though I still really liked how it wrapped up

Underland Chronicles: 2003 - 2007. So I might have read them right before high school

9:10 PM
@ACuriousMind Yeah, the stormlight archive wikipedia-style articles brought up Harmony before I was ready to read about it

yeah, the abundance of spoilers on the internet can be a problem

Which is why everyone was so scared about seeing Endgame too late haha

Also you could make the case that the audiobook spoiled it by using a unique accent when reading some of the chapter openers long before you should have known who was saying the words

Hah, well, that's a difficult choice, I guess

Yeah, it made sense to read it in their voice... but you could also make the case that it really didn't.

9:13 PM
Also an interesting demonstration how some methods of storytelling are very particular to their medium

9:27 PM
@BioPhysicist are the avengers movies worth watching?

I say yes
Have you not seen any?

i've seen the first one many years ago

The first Iron Man? Or the first Avengers movie?

both, but i was a kid and my memory is very foggy. might need to rewatch the first avengers if i decide to see em all

I mean if you are going to watch them might as well do all of the MCU movies

9:31 PM
that's a big time commitment :P

I suppose. But you can spread it out
Heck, most people spread them out over many, many years :P

my experience with marvel is having seen all the iron man movies, the first amazing spiderman movie and the first thor movie many, many years ago. but i've heard avengers incorporates from a lot of franchises

Yeah you kind of need to see most of the movies for it all to tie together at the end
But I have heard that people who hadn't seen previous movies still enjoyed others

@ACuriousMind So as far as I understand, if AI is trying to determine if someone is creditworthy or not, it looks at data, say race and figures out that black people are less likely to pay out their debt, therefore the AI becomes biased, no?

@JingleBells It's a bit more subtle than that since the "maker" of the AI determines what data it can look at during training to begin with. E.g. in your example one might wonder why there was "race" data in there to begin with, whether there is another datum that should be included it is using "race" as a proxy for (see confounding factor), and whether or not the patterns in the training data accurately reflect the patterns in real-world data.
(I don't really like this particular example because there are additional issues with using a protected characteristic like "race" as a predictor even if it is a technically accurate predictor that are distinct from the technical concept of bias)

9:45 PM
I'm reading articles but I'm still confused how AI can be biased.

If AI is trained on biased data then it will be biased
Plus ACM gave a fine example of the depixelisation

@JingleBells The meaning of "bias" here is not "the AI has prejudices and is a bigot" and more "it makes decisions based on criteria we didn't want it to"

I hate bigoted robots

E.g. one image recognition algorithm classified most pictures with hands in them as "fish" because its training set included many pictures of fishermen holding their haul, so it was "biased" towards thinking everything with a hand in it must depict a fish

So it all breaks down to the training dataset? If data is biased, ML model is biased?

9:52 PM
Well, you could also imagine that a model that "paid attention" in a different manner would have focused more on the actual "fish" part than the "hand" part.
so, no, it's not as simple as "the training data was bad". It often is, but it's still also the model that was written in a way to fixate on the badness

So to fix the problem, we can unbias the data or fix the model?

the challenge is to figure out how to do either of that :P
the datasets are often so large that manual pruning is infeasible, and figuring out how to get the model to fixate on the criteria we expect is kind of the holy grail

There was also this google thing when you google hand, white hands popped up and when you google black hand, black hands working in the dirt and stuff like that popped.
@ACuriousMind Sorry, just to clarify, on what data was the model trained and what was its goal?

I think it was one of these generic recognition things where you train it on a bunch of pictures that are tagged with what they depict and you want to be able to give it pictures and then it tags them with what it thinks they depict.

So for the bias to happen, the model was trained on pictures of hands and pictures of hands holding fish. When the time came to recognize hands, it sometimes thinks that the hand is a fish because it had focused too much on the hand rather than the fish when training?

10:09 PM
@JingleBells The real-world example was a bit different than what I said, see the link above.

I closed the page. It's too late and I got scared by the faces, no joke, I'll be having nightmares now

welcome to the wonders of AI :P

I seriously cant look at the faces and im scared to open the page
lets hope none of these faces pops up as my sleep paralysis demon

1 hour later…
11:34 PM
Could someone provide a name for the "ad" in "$\text{ad}_H$" in the context of a "Hamiltonian vector field".
the text I'm reading doesn't name it, just wanted to look it up

@Charlie You'd have to give a bit more context to be certain, but it's likely the adjoint action of vector fields on each other via the Lie bracket

ah that looks like it thank you