[-] CeffTheCeph@kbin.earth 3 points 1 month ago

This story doesn't even get into the problems from before 2020. The rabbit hole is fucking deep, and the systemic problems at TBPS well documented. As mentioned, this story is only the final episode in an award winning documentary series. The TBPS is a shit show.

[-] CeffTheCeph@kbin.earth 2 points 1 month ago

Most certainly recognize the Alumacraft canoe, but is that an original Don Meany XY paddle?

[-] CeffTheCeph@kbin.earth 3 points 2 months ago

You mention oil but it's also extremely true for deforestation, fishing, farming and several other things. Including water too actually.

It is! It seems as though our cut-throat capitalism or our central government models aren't really the best options for those life essential common pool resources. Can we try the third option next maybe, cooperation?

Not sure how deep into the tragedy you are but if you are unfamiliar, I'd recommend reading about Elinor_Ostrom's work in cooperative resource management.

[-] CeffTheCeph@kbin.earth 4 points 2 months ago

This is an interesting thought. In neoclassical production theory oil is treated simply as scarce input capital, not as a limited natural resource (as the pasture is considered in the tragedy). If we consider oil as being the common pool resource in our capitalism/free market model, when oil runs out what happens to the market when there are no longer any goods being produced that can go into the supply side?

Further thought to consider... is oil managed by the free market on a global scale today? Is it state run? Or cartel managed? The tragedy is resolved through cooperative resource management. I wonder what the world would look like if oil was cooperatively managed on a global scale? I don't mean that there is a global government structure in place that centrally manages oil, I mean a type of cooperative, polycentric governance system?

[-] CeffTheCeph@kbin.earth 2 points 3 months ago

Yes, I'm just overly pessimistic. It is complex and operates at different scales. There is no one panacea that will solve the climate crisis. We have to re-think how all of our processes work for us.

[-] CeffTheCeph@kbin.earth 2 points 5 months ago

Thanks, I think that is a useful observation. I agree in that I wouldn't necessarily say it is a problem for the validity of the proof itself, but I do like the extra scrutiny.

[-] CeffTheCeph@kbin.earth 3 points 5 months ago

This is fun, I appreciate it. I've only made it as far down this rabbit hole to the part of building AGI on current architecture. Had no idea how much deeper this thing goes. This is the reason I was engaged in the first place, thanks for leading me down here.

Tbf, I personally don’t think consciousness is necessarily non-algorithmic but that’s a different debate.

I'm looking forward to that one when it comes up!

[-] CeffTheCeph@kbin.earth 2 points 5 months ago
[-] CeffTheCeph@kbin.earth 3 points 5 months ago

However, their argument rely on that ”quantum gravity” is what makes the universe uncomputable. I’m not sure how valid this statement is.

Here is the assumption the authors use that brings quantum gravity into the proof:

As we do not have a fully consistent theory of quantum gravity, several different axiomatic systems have been proposed to model quantum gravity [26–32]. In all these programs, it is assumed a candidate theory of quantum gravity is encoded as a computational formal system F_QG = {L_QG, ΣQG, R_alg} .

I interpret their assumption to mean that describing quantum gravity in this way is how it would be defined as a formal computational system. This is the approach that all of the other leading theories (String Theory, Loop Quantum Gravity) have taken, which have failed to provide a fully consistent and complete description of gravity. I think the proof is saying that non-computational components can be incorporated into a fully consistent and complete formal system and so taking a non-computational approach to quantum gravity would then incorporate gravity into the formal system thereby completing the theory of everything.

Does that make sense? I am not a logician by any extent and I have no idea how robust this proof really is. I do think the bold claims the authors are making deserve heavy scrutiny, but I am not the one to provide that scrutiny.

[-] CeffTheCeph@kbin.earth 5 points 5 months ago

Disproving the 'matrix theory' is just the catchy headline to garner clicks. The results of the research are beyond just the matrix. For example, this proof means that non-algorithmic determinism isn't something that represents a lack of deeper theoretical understanding. There are theories that consciousness is non-algorithmic. In that case, this proof means that AGI is also impossible.

[-] CeffTheCeph@kbin.earth 1 points 5 months ago

I am also not a physicist nor a logician, just interested in the subject matter.

full of assertions not backed up by arguments

Can you provide some examples from the paper of assertions that aren't being backed up by arguments so I might try and look further into it? Thanks!

[-] CeffTheCeph@kbin.earth 2 points 6 months ago

It isn't a medical issue, or a public health issue. It is an economic issue. Pollution is widely recognized in our capitalistic world as an externality that just is. In other words, a 'public bad'. Mandatory vaccines are a public good, in the true sense of the word. Having a central government pay the cost of administering a vaccine that will improve public health and reduce risk/remediation costs will always be more efficient than if every individual in society had to pay those costs themselves. Economies of scale.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

CeffTheCeph

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 6 months ago