I’m talking about physically altering the outside world: creating a giant painting, growing a garden, building a house, etc. Anything that takes longer than one day to physically achieve will reset, undoing your progress.

Except everything which physically takes longer than 24 hours.

I remember Man of the Year being advertised as a straight comedy: Robin Williams plays a Jon Stewart type that actually gets elected president, hijinks ensue.

!It pretty quickly turned into a serious thriller. He didn’t even actually get elected, he only won because he entered the race after a program was installed on the electronic voting machines to steal the election for another candidate, and the convoluted conditions wound up favoring him instead.!<

Oh wow, flashback. I remember feeding four of us off a single bowl at the local Mongolian BBQ place. Other customers were literally hooting and cheering while I eased my tower to the grill. Apparently, they imposed a policy after that: one bowl means no higher than the rim. I was so proud.

I will always recommend base Catan. It’s simple enough that anyone can learn to play fairly quickly, and moves quickly enough that no one gets that mad if they lose. If anything, I find losing a game usually coincides with people understanding it better and being open to playing another round so they can demonstrate that understanding.

I got really bored with Twin Peaks at one point. Just felt like the magic was gone and it went stale. But I stuck with it, and the magic came back in a big way. After a little research, turns out my boredom exactly coincided with the period when Lynch was gone working on something else.

Shine on, you crazy diamond. The world is a bit less wonderful and strange with your passing.

I got Kim to dance with me in the church in Disco Elysium

Gaming is an absolutely massive economic sector, driven by the escapism of virtual worlds. The functional kernel of the metaverse is a universal game lobby, a place for people to congregate while they navigate between the games they play together.

humans can learn a bunch of stuff without first learning the content of the whole internet and without the computing power of a datacenter or consuming the energy of Belgium. Humans learn to count at an early age too, for example.

I suspect that if you took into consideration the millions of generations of evolution that “trained” the basic architecture of our brains, that advantage would shrink considerably.

I would say that the burden of proof is therefore reversed. Unless you demonstrate that this technology doesn’t have the natural and inherent limits that statistical text generators (or pixel) have, we can assume that our mind works differently.

I disagree. I’d argue evidence suggests we’re just a more sophisticated version of a similar principle, refined over billions of years. We learn facts by rote, and learn similarities by rote until we develop enough statistical text (or audio) correlations to “understand” the world.

Conversations are a slightly meandering chain of statistically derived cliches. English adjective order is universally “understood” by native speakers based purely on what sounds right, without actually being able to explain why (unless you’re a big grammar nerd). More complex conversations might seem novel, but they’re just a regurgitation of rote memorized facts and phrases strung together in a way that seems appropriate to the conversation based on statistical experience with past conversations.

Also you say immature technology but this technology is not fundamentally (I.e. in terms of principle) different from what Weizenabum’s ELIZA in the '60s. We might have refined model and thrown a ton of data and computing power at it, but we are still talking of programs that use similar principles.

As with the evolution of our brains, which have operated on basically the same principles for hundreds of millions of years. The special sauce between human intelligence and a flatworm’s is a refined model.

So yeah, we don’t understand human intelligence but we can appreciate certain features that absolutely lack on GPTs, like a concept of truth that for humans is natural.

I’m not sure you can claim that absolutely. That kind of feature is an internal experience, you can’t really confirm or deny if a GPT has something similar. Besides, humans have a pretty tenuous relationship with the concept of truth. There are certainly humans that consider objective falsehoods to be Truth.

It’s also pretty young, human toddlers hallucinate and make things up. Adults too. Even experts are known to fall prey to bias and misconception.

I don’t think we know nearly enough about the actual architecture of human intelligence to start asserting an understanding of “understanding”. I think it’s a bit foolish to claim with certainty that LLMs in a MoE framework with self-review fundamentally can’t get there. Unless you can show me, materially, how human “understanding” functions, we’re just speculating on an immature technology.

I dabble in comics and manga too, so I prefer the full screen to an e-ink display. It’s also nice for videos.

I just got a foldable. The increase in functionality of reading on my phone is substantial, and that’s such a big fraction of my phone use that I consider it worthwhile. I wouldn’t be as productive if I had to carry a bulky e-reader with me all the time, it’s incredibly convenient to be able to fold it up and put it in my pocket.

It’s a bit heavier, but I got used to it quickly. My old phone feels suspiciously light now, like a toy. The expense is certainly a factor, but for me the utility is worth it in the long run. It’s not for everyone, but there are people it makes sense for.

I think they interviewed people in his circles, and I think a friend flippantly noticed it was kinda ironic that they played Among Us with someone who went on to actually assassinate someone, and now the media is twisting that into the standard “video games cause violence” bugbear.

Exile was pretty good, minus the pixel hunting on the forest level, but I’d say overall quality dropped off pretty quickly after that.

It’s a regional story. If it was an African, or Asian, or Latin American, or American Indian story, would it be okay to make the characters European so long as the story is good?

If your answer is “Yes”, then okay at least you’re consistent, but a lot of people would disagree.

If your answer is “No, because white people are disproportionately represented in media”, that’s exactly why we should prefer making media based on other cultures and regions, rather than endlessly remaking the same European stories so Disney can protect their IP.

… /s?

I mean, even all the way back in Grimm, she’s described with “skin as white as snow, lips as red as blood and hair as black as ebony”. Like I get what you’re saying, but having very, very white skin is literally(literally literally) a central detail of the character. Hence the name.

I feel like maybe the answer isn’t to keep remaking European fairy tales. Maybe the focus should be on, I dunno, folk tales from anywhere else? Or, God forbid, an original story?

Bonelab was barely even a game, it was basically a demo for the Marrow engine. I still enjoyed it, but 100% the core focus was to demonstrate the capabilities of their physics engine.

I think the Steam release definitely makes it easier, especially with the tutorial. I tried to get into the original version about 10 years back and let’s just say going in blind was a very different experience.

Dwarf Fortress, probably.