Why the law of large numbers?
I’d think it’s p-hacking. Meaning if he tried out many different combinations, the chances are high he’d eventually come across some which are only correlated by chance. Here’s a related XKCD:
Do you know what the B in Benoît B. Mandelbrot stands for?
It’s for Benoît B. Mandelbrot.
This article of a dentist testing other dentists gives some more anecdotal evidence: https://www.rd.com/article/how-honest-are-dentists/
In that case it actually makes sense because the main goal is to make an artificial entity appear intelligent to the player. This is not the same as calling all ML algorithms/models AI.
Europa nicht den Laien überlassen ;)
What’s the painting called? Looks so atmospheric.
At first I thought it said Akorn police and was a reference to the recent acorn incident.
Thanks, I didn’t know that was an option. But these easier ways of blocking can be reversed within seconds, right? I need something that is difficult to undo.
Thanks, I needed that post. I’m in a similar boat. I get addicted to this stuff (YT, lemmy, reddit etc.) easily, and I’ve found that a moderate use is just not possible for me in the long run. It can’t really coexist in my life with leisure activities that require me to sustain my attention for longer, like reading, practicing an instrument, or even just sitting down and listening to a good album intently.
What helps me a bit is putting all kinds of hindrances in place:
But none of that has worked as much as I’d like. It’s a constant struggle and I’m still looking for a better solution.
Doing interesting stuff has somehow in my mind turned into work.
That’s the worst part. Scroll too much and that state becomes your new baseline. Now anything that is less captivating and effortless than that feels difficult.
(*) I’m not sure if subdomain is the correct term here. If anyone knows, please correct me.
I’m kind of dissatisfied with the answers here. As soon as you talk about actually drawing a line in the real world, the distinction between rational and irrational numbers stops making sense. In other words, the distinction between rational and irrational numbers is a concept that describes numbers to an accuracy that is impossible to achieve in real life. So you cannot draw a line with a clearly irrational length, but neither can you draw a line with a clearly rational length. You can only define theoretical mathematical constructs which can then be classified as rational or irrational, if applicable.
More mathematically phrased: in real life, your line to which you assign the length L will always have an inaccuracy of size x>0. But for any real L, the interval (L-x;L+x) contains both an infinite number of rational and an infinite number of irrational numbers. Note that this is independent of how small the value of x is. This is why I said that the accuracy, at which the concept of rational and irrational numbers make sense, is impossible to achieve in real life.
So I think your confusion stems from mixing the lengths we assign to objects in the real world with the lengths we can accurately compute for mathematical objects that we have created in our minds using axioms and definitions.
Well maybe we should ‘hack’ his limbs off
Thanks for the suggestion, I’ll put it on my list.
You like Lain, rats, and silly catposting?? Do you wanna be frens?