Hierarchy, being a chain of command in which an individual above, privvy to more information, gives you instructions to follow. This includes military organizations, but is just as applicable to a doctor-patient relationship.

Coercion, meaning the threat of retaliation, through physical force, revoking of freedoms or privileges, or denial of resources.

Voluntary, meaning of one’s own means, with no coercion or realization of coercion, with the clear option to opt out being present whenever possible.

This does not leave things in question, I believe. Currently, we all operate within hierarchies at work with explicit threats of destitution being held over our heads, through the denial of currency. Meanwhile, there is no coercion from your physician despite it still being hierarchical in nature, because the hierarchy is entirely based on trust and is voluntary.

I think that is a misreading of why moral codes come into being, and I am not trying to preach moralism.

Moral codes are not universal truths, but instead rules of engagement for maintaining order within a system, and they exist within every social scope, though their level of detail tends to decay as the scope becomes more interpersonal. They’re not really a tool of the state, but instead just a human tool. The state just codifies its own and disseminates it into the social collectives it rules.

My statement above is a moral observation about political morality within the US, and which I view is generally a useful rule within any democratic political system (I am referring to systems which have a structure and voting system associated with democratic processes, not necessarily ideal or actual democracies).

I am also not saying that this moral code is necessarily good for us or the system itself at any given moment, but stating why this moral code exists in the first place, and why anyone who is apart of our system and wants that system to survive (whether that be for avoiding personal turmoil or political ideology) will continue to condemn assassination attempts from any side.

By weighing all violence as immoral you are not ruling it out completely. You make it a last-resort, where you avoid one great injustice with a lesser injustice - a lesser injustice which you still face consequences for.

The alternative is morally sanctifying some murders, which leads to ‘morally justified’ murders being done by all political sides (since they each view themselves as ‘the moral ones’), and which eventually gets twisted into the party in power murdering their opponents with impunity because it’s ‘morally justified’.

There were times when individuals did not work for someone higher than them on a pecking order, though that model is physically not possible in an industrial society, I think.

That being said, hierarchies can be made voluntary rather than enforced by threat of violence, and I’d argue that requiring all servitude to be uncoerced would lead to a better future.

Cat so homophobic it’s not even comfortable with homochromia.

O

L

“Stand in the ashes of a trillion dead souls and ask the ghosts if honor matters. The silence is your answer.” -Javik, Mass Effect 3

It needs to capture sweat too.

I understand some instruction expansions today are used to good effect in x86, but that there are also a sizeable number of instructions that are rarely utilized by compilers and are mostly only continuing to exist for backwards compatibility. That does not really make me think “more instructions are usually better”. It makes me think “CISC ISAs are usually bloated with unused instructions”.

My whole understanding is that while more specific instruction options do provide benefits, the use-cases of these instructions make up a small amount of code and often sacrifice single-cycle completion. The most commonly cited benefit for RISC is that RISC can complete more work (measured in ‘clockcycles per program’ over ‘clockrate’) in a shorter cyclecount, and it’s often argued that it does so at a lower energy cost.

I imagine that RISC-V will introduce other standards in the future (hopefully after it’s finalized the ones already waiting), hopefully with thoroughly thought out instructions that will actually find regular use.

I do see RISC-V proponents running simulated benchmarks showing RISC-V is more effective. I have not seen anything similar from x86 proponents, who usually either make general arguments, or worse , just point at the modern x86 chips that have decades of research, funding, and design behind them.

Overall, I see alot of doubt that ISAs even matter to performance in any significant fashion, and I believe it for performance at the GHz/s level of speed.

Instruction creep maybe? Pretty sure I’ve also seen stuff that seems to show that Torvalds is anti-speculative-execution due to its vulnurabilities, so he could also be referring to that.

Marvel and Starwars have been taking heat for pumping out boring and poorly written films for a while now. I think Pixar’s stuff is still mostly decent, though. That being said, I also expect a completely different standard of work from Pixar since it’s for kids first and foremost.

You were the one who implied that, by saying that not having children leaves it up to those who will.

You already have an entire vocabulary for solar time (sunrise, morning, noon, evening, sunset, night, midnight). This being all of a sudden assigned to a different time on a clock does not change things in any dramatic fashion. It would also be a consistent change for your current location, guarantee it only takes you less than a work week to acclimate.

All the things you’ve described I’ve literally been doing for 6 months now. It is not a noticable difference and does not impact me.

Also, a book that says “it was 5 o’clock” is objectively more boring than one that describes the shadows of twilight blanketing the scene in a checkering of shadow. Also TV shows show outside, where solar time is visibly apparent. The specific time is not nearly as relevant.

Also, you already look up time zones when scheduling international meetings, and those aren’t going to tell you about siestas or other local practices which might affect scheduling. Maybe just actually ask the person what times will work when trying to schedule, and now since you’re both using UTC, you both can figure it out together without looking up timezones.

Adoption. Community building. Helping the disenfranchised.

These are all methods of bettering the future without pumping another child into this world. And arguably, they’re morally better than having a child.

I agree that bringing life into the world is morally bad. I also agree that eating other animals is morally bad, as is killing, always. However, that does not mean we should not do these things at times. You just need to understand that you are still committing an immoral act for personal gain. There is no such thing as a perfectly moral existence, as the world is a cruel place which cares little about morality and often forces you to be immoral. You should instead work towards being as moral as in out can when you can, and accept that sometimes morality is out of your hands.

In the case of the child: you are bringing a human consciousness kicking and screaming into this world you know to be dangerous and cruel. That is immoral, and you did it either by failing precaution, or out of personal want or instinct. I think to repent, you are morally obligated to give that child a good life at minimum and ideally the best life you can. You are beholden to them until they can live on their own happily, and you are obligated to help them even after that. I also think that if that child resents how you’ve cared for them, you have no grounds to hold that against them, as you were the one that forced them into this world.

If you cannot do the above, you are should reconsider whether you are fit to have a child.

It is also arguable that to do justice without injustice, the only option is to adopt or guide another person who has no one providing things they need, and I don’t think this kindness should be limited to children but children are the most vulnerable.

I view it as sidelining cars to improve public transportation.

• First thing is to eliminate and revise public zoning laws and removing parking minimums. This causes change the slowest but is the most important to start since it will lead to denser population centers, and parking garages can be closer to residence.
• Second move I think is to eliminate extra lanes and trim road widths. This leads to driving being something that takes more focus and is slower. This also frees space for bike lanes and even dedicated bus lanes.
• Slowly phase out free parking across the city. Start with spots directly next to crosswalks so that there is better visibility of pedestrians crossing. Then focus on bus routes to free a dedicated lane when possible. This discourages driving since there’s fewer chances you’ll be able to park close to the place you are going.
• While this is occurring, you should be introducing public transit as it becomes feasible. More buses or trams, guarded bike lanes, etc.
• MAINTAIN YOUR PUBLIC TRANSIT!! As trains and buses fall into disrepair the number of people willing to ride it will drop off. Also keep the bike lanes and sidewalks clear and smooth.

That’s what I’ve got. It takes decades to break down this infrastructure for new stuff. You also need the to be having accessibility in mind whenever you are thinking about installing public amenities or removing infrastructure.

Material phase changes are like a cheat code for humanity. Reusable chemical handwarmers are also black magic. You just click a metal plate inside and all of a sudden it’s a hot solid.

NightHawkInLight made a video showing how you can mix two different salts together and it’ll create a packet that stays at 65 degrees for hours.

Video in question

Miles is chill in my book. I appreciate what he is tackling, and hope he continues.

It seems that there are much worse issues with AI systems that are happening right now. I think those issues should be taking precedent over the alignment problem.

Some of the issues are bad enough right now that AI development and use should be banned for a limited time frame (at least 5 years) while we figure out more ethical ways of doing it. The fact that we aren’t doing that is a massive failure of our already constantly-fucking-up governments.

My brain just did some work. Now I can’t unseen this as that manly handshake scene from Predator. The two 'i’s are the guys, and the ‘W’ is a zoom-in of their handshake.