are we just amusing ourselves until death?

IMO, yes. But just calling it “entertainment” is a bit reductionist, I think.

But yeah. And I don’t see anything is wrong with that. Having a cat is cool, video games are fun, and good company is fulfilling in a powerful, indescribable, way.

To experience that kind of stuff, and for others to do the same, as much and as often as possible, is what I live for.

Yeah, there’s a lot of bad stuff in the world. But I’m able to make my corner of it quite liveable. And not just for myself, but for friends and family.

I can’t save the world, but I can decide to make the sliver of it that I’ll interact with throughout my life, a little bit nicer.

The part I struggle with, is finding a way to make living, that makes things better, not worse. Jobs that don’t contribute towards people having less and less time for the things that make life worth living, are non-existent.

Historically, there is no need to share a border with the US for them to come fuck your shit up.

Whether they leave you alone is… Not about whether you border a NATO member country.

Certainly not if you’re Russia.

I don’t know about anyone else, but the reason I say stuff like “fake frames, real flames” about nvidia, is that they include framegen in their performance stats.

As if it’s a tech that boosts actual performance. They use it to lie.

When they say “this card is twice as powerful as last gen” what they really mean is, it is exactly the same, but we turned on 2x framegen. Nevermind that there’s no reason you couldn’t do the same on the last gen card.

National anthem plays

Obviously. It too does wine environment management. But it’s meant for games, and for wine specifically, Bottles is just nicer.

Lutris is massive overkill if you just want run the windows version of python in order to compile python code to windows binaries. Not to mention it just isn’t as slick in terms of UX as a wine manager.

It’s not a catch-all game launcher.

It’s a wine environment manager. And it is becoming increasingly good at simplying the complexity of setting up wine bottles for different things.

It’s basically winetricks on steroids, with a really nice GUI to boot.

Running windows games is just one use-case.

Does the US have citizens iniatives?

This isn’t just a change.org petition. In the EU (and a lot of member countries) theres a system for citizens initiatives, which have the same or similar legal weight as laws proposed by legislators.

That doesn’t mean the proposed laws get passed, but it does mean the people can bypass the politicians in order to at least get something onto the starting line.

Ah. I guess steam uses it to emulate a gamepad to transmit the controller inputs over.

That would have been Quantum Break. I don’t recall Control having any one cutscene that long.

But Quantum Break did the whole video-game/TV-series hybrid media thing, and was full of “episodes” that were essentially 30-minute cutscenes.

I dunno man.

It’s not like linux applications ever have different app-names in the menu, when compared to the package name you just saw when installing it.

That has never tripped me up. No. Never.

/S

It’s probably time based.

And this kind of thing isn’t for the type of people who mess with settings. If this defaulted to off, then it would actually be useless.

Yeah. Plus they immediately got a reply from someone showing where you can turn it off in settings.

Sunshine is what I use, too. You can set it up to adapt your monitor resolution to the deck upon connecting, and set it back to normal upon disconnect. Very handy.

You definitely can turn off steaminput with proton. Per-game, too.

Superpowered lying is already a thing, and all we needed was demographic data and context control.

Today, it is possible to get a population to believe almost anything. Show them the right argument, at the right time, in the right context, and they believe it. Facebook and google have scaled up exactly that into their main sources of revenue.

Same goes for attention hacking. AI generated content designed to hook viewers functions in entirely predictable, and fairly well understood ways. And the same goes for the algorithms which “recommend” additional content based on what someone is watching.

As for why doctors can’t do things AIs are pulling off, I’d suggest that’s because current systems are using indicators we don’t know about, which they aren’t sentient enough to explain. If they could, I have no doubt a human doctor, given enough time, could learn about, and detect, such indicators.

There is no evidence that what these models are doing, is “beyond our scale of thinking”.

But again, I do think the machine will be faster.

Current models display “emergent capabilities”, as in abilities we don’t know about before the model is created and tested. But once it is created, we can and have figured out what it is doing and how.

Fair.

I’ve removed it, and I’m sorry.

Logic is logic. There is no “advanced” logic that somehow allows you to decipher aspects of reality you otherwise could not. Humanity has yet to encounter anything that cannot be consistently explained in more and more detail, as we investigate it further.

We can and do answer complex questions. That human society is too disorganized to disseminate the answers we do have, and act on them at scale, isn’t going to be changed by explaining the same thing slightly better.

Imagine trying to argue against a perfect proof. Take something as basic as 1 + 1 = 2. Now imagine an argument for something much more complex - like a definitive answer to climate change, or consciousness, or free will - delivered with the same kind of clarity and irrefutability.

Absolutely nothing about humans makes me think we are incapable of finding such answers on our own. And if we are genuinely incapable of developing a definitive answer on something, I’m more inclined to believe there isn’t one, than assume that we are simply too “small-minded” to find an answer that is obvious to the hypothetical superintelligence.

But precision of thought orders of magnitude beyond our own.

This is just the “god doesn’t need to make sense to us, his thoughts are beyond our comprehension” -argument, again.

Just like a five-year-old thinks they understand what it means to be an adult - until they grow up and realize they had no idea.

They don’t know, because we don’t tell them. Children in adverse conditions are perfectly capable of understanding the realities of survival.

You are using the fact that there are things we don’t understand, yet, as if it were proof that there are things we can’t understand, ever. Or eventually figure out on our own.

That non-sentients cannot comprehend sentience (ants and humans) has absolutely no relevance on whether sentients are able to comprehend other sentients (humans and machine intelligences).

I think machine thinking, in contrast to the human mind, will just be a faster processor of logic.

There is absolutely nothing stopping the weakest modern CPU from running the exact same code as the fastest modern CPU. The only difference will be the rate at which the work is completed.

We’re incapable of even imagining how convincing of an argument a system like this could make.

Vaguely gestures at all of sci-fi, depicting the full spectrum of artificial sentience, from funny comedic-relief idiot, to literal god.

What exactly do you mean by that?

Firmware bug?

AFAIK openrazer doesn’t provide firmware updates, so if it needs an update to fix something, you can’t update without razers software.

This is the same logic people apply to God being incomprehensible.

Are you suggesting that if such a thing can be built, its word should be gospel, even if it is impossible for us to understand the logic behind it?

I don’t subscribe to this. Logic is logic. You don’t need a new paradigm of mind to explore all conclusions that exist. If something cannot be explained and comprehended, transmitted from one sentient mind to another, then it didn’t make sense in the first place.

And you might bring up some of the stuff AI has done in material science as an example of it doing things human thinking cannot. But that’s not some new kind of thinking. Once the molecular or material structure was found, humans have been perfectly capable of comprehending it.

All it’s doing, is exploring the conclusions that exist, faster. And when it comes to societal challenges, I don’t think it’s going to find some win-win solution we just haven’t thought of. That’s a level of optimism I would consider insane.

Even if it is, I don’t see what it’s going to conclude that we haven’t already.

If we do build “the AI that will save us” it’s just going to tell us “in order to ensure your existence as a species, take care of the planet and each other” and I really, really, can’t picture a scenario where we actually listen.