i think it's when you and a bunch of other vegans live in a group home together and argue over who does the dishes

a lot of this "computational irreducibility" nonsense could be subsumed by the time hierarchy theorem which apparently Stephen has never heard of

He straight up misstates how NP computation works. Essentially he writes that a nondeterministic machine M computes a function f if on every input x, there exists a path of M(x) which outputs f(x). But this is totally nonsense - it implies that a machine M which just branches repeatedly to produce every possible output of a given size "computes" every function of that size.

the ruliad is something in a sense infinitely more complicated. Its concept is to use not just all rules of a given form, but all possible rules. And to apply these rules to all possible initial conditions. And to run the rules for an infinite number of steps

So it's the complete graph on the set of strings? Stephen how the fuck is this going to help with anything

if two people disagree on a conclusion then either they disagree on the reasoning or the premises.

I don't think that's an accurate summary. In Aumann's agreement theorem, the different agents share a common prior distribution but are given access to different sources of information about the random quantity under examination. The surprising part is that they agree on the posterior probability provided that their conclusions (not their sources) are common knowledge.

CS has a huge number of people who think you can derive the solutions to social problems from first principles. It's impossible to reason with them.

You're totally misunderstanding the context of that statement. The problem of classifying an image as a certain animal is related to the problem of generating a synthetic picture of a certain animal. But classifying an image of as a certain animal is totally unrelated to generating a natural-language description of "information about how to distinguish different species". In any case, we know empirically that these LLM-generated descriptions are highly unreliable.

Mr. Costantino said the design was not at fault and that the towering mast, which stood 237 feet tall, had not created “any kind of problem.”

“The ship was an unsinkable ship,” he said. “I say it, I repeat it.”

- Designer of sunken ship

value is when line go up

I don't want to come and help "balance out" someone who thinks that using they/them pronouns is worse than committing genocide.

Does anyone really think this, or are you just using hyperbole?

Not hyperbole. Hanania, Manifest promoted speaker, wrote "Why Do I Hate Pronouns More Than Genocide?" in May 2022.

I just can't, it's like that one scene from Austin Powers.

"[massive deficiency] isn't a flaw of the program because it's designed to have that deficiency"

it is a problem that it plagiarizes, how does saying "it's designed to plagiarize" help????

The normal way to reproduce information which can only be found in a specific source would be to cite that source when quoting or paraphrasing it.