231
alan tur(ule)ing
(thelemmy.club)
its a shame how the british govt treated him, he was an extraordinary man
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2026
231 points (98.7% liked)
196
6579 readers
1045 users here now
Community Rules
You must post before you leave
Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).
Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.
Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.
Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".
Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.
Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.
Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.
Avoid AI generated content.
Avoid misinformation.
Avoid incomprehensible posts.
No threats or personal attacks.
No spam.
Moderator Guidelines
Moderator Guidelines
- Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
- Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
- When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
- Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
- Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
- Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
- Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
- Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
- Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
- Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
- Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
- Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
- First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
- Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
- No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
- Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
- Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The Turing test only measures one thing: how well a given algorithm can pass the Turing test. It's been mythologized to the point of irrelevance.
While I have people's attention: "Schrödinger's cat" is the polar opposite of what people think it is. Erwin Schrödinger hated and strongly disagreed with the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, which holds that quantum mechanical systems are indeterministic until observed or measured. He did not come up with the "Schrödinger's cat" thought experiment to explain superposition -- he invented it to illustrate, in a macroscopic and intuitive way, why he thought Bohr's and Heisenberg's interpretation was stupid.
Also, Bohr is a fake ass bitch and a fucking redditor before reddit. Einstein was right.
You make a good point and then circle back to what we all already knew anyways: Einstein was right.
I still remember the first time i learned the intention behind schrödingers cat and i was so relieved because that's how i always saw it
So, according to Schrödinger, the cat is either dead or alive, and you just don't know its state until you open the box? Is that it?
What you described is more or less consistent with Schrödinger's views.
In the Copenhagen interpretation, a quantum system is described by a wave function (the probability density of all of its possible states; the cat is maybe dead and maybe alive) until it is observed, at which point it collapses into one of its possible states (the cat is definitively dead or definitively alive).
As far as I can tell, in Schrödinger's views, there is no superposition and there is no collapse, and a system is described directly by its wave function, which changes over time.
But this is all just interpretation. I don't even know where to start looking for empirical evidence that supports one or the other, or whether there's even a point philosophizing about it.
yeah i kind of fundamentally disagree with both interpretations to be honest. both take what ill call a literalist interpretation of the complex statistical math used to describe quantum mechanics. its a conceptual trap usually reserved for novices in other fields, but which for some reason certain people who study quantum mechanics fall into. i think the math is a powerful predictive tool, but that reading too deeply into it and trying to claim that the weirdness literally describes the fundamental nature of reality is a mistake. at the end of the day the whole wave function collapse thing is a statement about our knowledge of the system, not the literal state of it.
like seriously, what idiot would think that a particle stops being a particle just because its not interacting with a measurement device? the simplest answer is that it doesnt, the particle still exists when we arent looking at it, the math just tells us the probability of it being in a given position and velocity. sure theres some structure there which shows up in the experimental results, but that implies that theres stuff going on that we dont understand even if the math correctly predicts it, at least to me.
i think the reason we cant resolve the intepretations one way or the other is partly from dogmatic inertia in the field, which is something that every revolutionary theory of physics falls into eventually, but mostly because we're running into the fundamental limits of what we can measure using photons interacting with particles. in other words heisenburgs uncertainty principle is in the way.
i wont claim to know what to do about it either, but i think it is important to explore outside the canonical interpretations at this point. lots of the breakthroughs of the past started as philosophical arguments first, so its certainly worth exploring without the burden of established dogma.