• 3 Posts
Joined 2Y ago
Cake day: Mar 25, 2021


Metaphysically, shape (color comes from the shape of molecules). Epistemologically, color (shape is perceived as the arrangement of colors).

Interesting read. But it seems to assume more intelligence increases similarity to humans, which is especially not true about systems with very specialized skills.

A person of culture, huh? Thanks a lot! I’ve been a longtime fan of the Esolangs wiki, in fact I dedicated a great deal of effort to prove that Numberwang is Turing-complete. I devised a method to translate any Brainfuck program into it, began writing a script to do so but lost interest before completing it.

I’ve discussed this in length with a friend today. I agree that this is far from a clear-cut defeat for Russia, could even give them advantage later on as this video clearly illustrates, but idk I want to understand it better and see how the Operation unravels further before making a bad judgement. No copium, I hope.

— in the U.K., to be a Republican means to support the end of monarchy —

Lmao at this just-in-case explanation.

I’m still waiting for some absolute chad to name a programming language after some obscure Unicode character…

I once tried to make an actual program in Lambda Calculus. It pretty much looked like that…

You can chill a bit with the nice people here, no need to spark debate.

Well, I hope to finish it as soon as possible. Unfortunately I’ve made very little progress this summer… My goal it synthesize proteins and DNA, which would make research much cheaper.

Interesting read. I’m not sure what to think about the Uyghur matter given the sheer amount of incoming info. I’ve tried to be critical of this article, so I believe I should make my analysis clear here:

  • There are three sides in this story: interviewed people, UN report and the Chinese government.
  • It talks about the Chinese authorities denying or condemning various statements, but notably doesn’t offer any further explanation, while the other two sides get to explain themselves.
  • The article states that the Chinese government released personal data and imagery, but doesn’t mention a reason. This seems to attempt to give the impression that doxxing her was the intention, but she lives in the US and for all I know that info could be intended as proof of non-stated facts.
  • Some mention family members being detained. The alleged reasons for their detention are not made explicit. I tried to learn more about this in a linked article, but all it stated was that “reasons including …”, which is a phrasing that indicates hiding of information, and thus a high risk of bias.
  • “The report demolished Beijing’s counter-terrorism framework” seems to be a purely personal judgement, as the report didn’t deny that countering terrorism was indeed the goal of those efforts.

Overall, I think this article might be biased towards one end of the story, and is explaining the facts in a way that intentionally pushes a non-objective narrative. In particular, I found it problematic that the article is challenging the statements issued by the UN report, which constitutes higher-quality evidence than testimonials.

Mostly, selling social structure data (who you’re talking with, etc.). I believe they also do some other sort of business with some clients.

I find those media are either for people promoting themselves (e.g. Instagram) or companies making profit out of social interaction (e.g. WhatsApp). Whatever, it’s all business, so I mostly agree.

You can look at the modlog to what posts have been removed and why. I routinely disagree with Lemmy* users from the entire political spectrum, as I find it more important to offer good arguments than to suit my views on anything. Anyway, you’re welcome to co-moderate with me if I can trust you won’t do any of the things you mention a mod could end up doing ;)

Don’t worry. As stated in the rules, no posts will be removed over politics, and I will not personally intervene for anything not stated in the rules. I’ve made the community on Lemmy so people from many instances can post there and feel safe. I believe it’ll be beneficial for all communities to have an environment to just share well-informed knowledge rather than attack each other :)

Extremely interesting. But one wonders if these “prebunking” methods wouldn’t be affected by the team’s unconscious or conscious biases, which in turn may be affected by misinformation.

Yeah, although I’ve realized I enjoy the meal more if I don’t.

Superficially it doesn’t look like it. But recent stats indicate that an increasing share of the male population in Spain sees feminism as an “oppressive” (???) movement. I’ve myself checked (I’m Spanish) that many male and female friends of mine show such opinions in private, even if they don’t generally show them, and the tendency is increasing.

How does the labor market work under socialism?
Every production system has a way to assign jobs to citizens. The basic idea is that the kinds of labor "required" by society for an efficient fulfillment of needs don't necessarily align with those that an unhindered free choice of jobs would afford. The way this is solved under capitalism is letting labor be a commodity, subject to market forces. Workers earn wages that are determined by the demand for their work and the availability of it. The difference in wages across jobs pushes us towards working jobs we otherwise wouldn't. I believe the importance of the job market is underestimated in past Marxist literature. It used to be the case that labor was expendable and interchangeable; the availability of any one kind of labor greatly surpassed demand, making wages just a way to keep the proletariat living and reproducing. However, with an increase in automation, those jobs have long ago disappeared in developed countries, and new ones are taking their place. Notably, these new jobs increasingly require training, which has the effect of making a worker unsuitable for all but their own specialized job. As a result, wages are now established mainly by market forces. If an employer can, by virtue of the rest of the economy, offer worse working conditions than minimally required by the workforce, they will. Conversely, if a particular kind of labor is sold for a higher price, the employer will oblige. As a special case that I'd like to mention, those that are very heavily demanded (e.g. public figures, elite sportsmen...) can get extremely high market prices for their labor. This is a new mechanic that has become more common. I'd like to discuss how a Socialist country would tackle the problem of job distribution, in a way that hopefully offers better guarantees than a free job market.