Simplifying a bit, the Treasury should introduce a fixed-coupon perpetuity and a fixed-value floating-rate perpetuity. These should gradually make up the bulk of government debt.
I think this is ultimately the only way it can work, you need an antifragile ally, the friendly gradient hacker. Indeed, I think it is the only way we have ever seen a robustly aligned human, that you would trust to scale outside of their circumstances.
If every uh software engineer knew to watch out for false serial dependency chains, things where they were creating series of dependent operations that could not be optimized away or other sorts of architectural problems like that that cannot be easily fixed, then the world would look more like just wait and optimize the hotspot, right?
So, I think the key point here is the self is not immutable. It's something that can change. People might think my personality is this way. It can never change. Well, your personality is the product of your society of mind.
So, as soon as you switch into something, there's a cost carried over from the previous task, and you're much slower and more difficult for the couple of next trials on the new task. So, there's always a switching cost
This design work is never done, and one of the goals of this intentional conversation is to open the door to revisiting this conversation as our individual needs and the needs of the relationship change.
And most of them really sent reports that their agent produced without actually even testing it. I would I would take a stronger sense of explaining what are the parts that we guarantee and what are the parts that will not be fixed because that that's not our security boundary.
But just because we have a fixed relatively fixed number of cells doesn't mean that we can't change the connections between those cells. And that's happening all the time. And that is, you know, the main principle of neuroplasticity.
Government is where the literal money is (money that could often go much further if we fixed what's wrong with government), but it's also where the impact is. And it's where the legitimacy is.
So often with new software paradigms, what looks like inevitability turns out to be just design failure that can be solved with the right guardrails or affordances or system instructions.
For that to be true, agents need to be able to see and understand the system. And agents need to be able to improve the things that need fixed. For that to be true, humans need to be able to see and understand the system and then take action to fix it. Uh and for that to be true, we got to see the system.
There were booms and busts, and cumulative price inflation was zero, and the United States went from a new-world emerging backwater in the late 1700s to being the world's largest economy by the late 1800s.
changing the dripper diameter, keeping all other important variables fixed, has no impact on the brew mechanics and the resulting cup, in an "idealized" scenario
When AWS ships a service which is half-baked, it diminishes customer trust in AWS as a whole; even if the problems in that service ultimately get corrected (either by fixing them or in some cases by simply getting rid of a service which should never have existed in the first place) the memory of a failed launch will live on in customers' minds for years to come.
I think that sedentary armies, sedentary civilizations, they get stuck in ways, this is how we do it. And we're going to make it a little faster, we're going to make it a little bigger, a little stronger but this is how we think. Genghis Khan had no set way to think and, when he encountered the first walled cities around 1209 after founding his nation in 1206, he went out on these raids and I really think there were raids not wars at first.
Clients still pay a fixed monthly retainer to ensure the professional maintenance of the whole portfolio, and to get access to the expertise of all of Geomys’ maintainers.
Physics hardly even acknowledges that the universe is random at its base. We like to think we live in a deterministic universe and everything’s deterministic. But I think that’s probably an artifact of the way that we’ve written down laws of physics since Newton invented modern physics and his conception of motion and gravity, which he formulated laws that had initial conditions and fixed dynamical laws.
Most subject matter is learnable, even stuff that seems really hard. But beyond that, many (most?) traits that people treat as fixed are actually quite malleable if you (1) believe they are and (2) put the same kind of work into learning them as you would anything else.
Because patents have fixed term lengths, with small extensions to compensate for the year or so when the drug is under regulatory review, drug developers are incentivized to go after conditions where clinical trials can be completed quickly, all else being equal.
In my practice, I have seen that opening neural pathways can lead to profound change, to brand-new traits and behavior, sometimes in a matter of minutes.
Neurobiologists tell us that it takes two things to unlock and open up a neural pathway. The first is that the implicit must be made explicit. Sometimes you need help seeing what you don't see. But you must be open to the feedback. Second, there must be some sort of recoil, a sense of discrepancy, of "Oh no, I'm not sure I really want to keep doing that."
So, my technical recommendation to Elon, and I said this on the Twitter spaces afterward, I said this many times during my brief internship, was that you need re-factors before features.
A korrent is a belief a person has stated in their own words: one
sentence stating the claim, backed by a quote and a source, kept at
korrents.com.
Under a name here, the quoted block is what they actually said.
The korrent beneath it is the claim those words support, in
korrents' wording — tap it to see the record, its source, and who
else holds it.
Nobody here wrote their own korrents. They are compiled from public
statements, and a person can change their mind, which is recorded too.
About the English under a post
Some people here publish in a language other than English. Where they
do, this site shows a machine translation beneath the post, in
this typeface — the site's own, not theirs.
The post itself is never changed, moved or hidden: what is set in the
serif above is exactly what the person published, and it is what to
quote them on. A translation can be wrong in ways that matter,
especially about tone.
Only the post's own words are translated. A quoted post, a linked
article and a belief on korrents.com
are left in their original language.