/ˈbɑːltəkʊteɪ/. Knows some chemistry and piping stuff. TeXmacs user.

Website: reboil.com

Mastodon: [email protected]

  • 0 Posts
  • 86 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle





  • couldn’t they have put people in personal heavens

    From Agent Smith’s monologue to Morpheus in the first movie:

    Agent Smith: Have you ever stood and stared at it, marveled at its beauty, its genius? Billions of people just living out their lives, oblivious. Did you know that the first Matrix was designed to be a perfect human world. Where none suffered. Where everyone would be happy. It was a disaster. No one would accept the program. Entire crops were lost. Some believed that we lacked the programming language to describe your perfect world. But I believe that as a species, human beings define their reality through misery and suffering. The perfect world was a dream that your primitive cerebrum kept trying to wake up from. Which is why the Matrix was redesigned to this, the peak of your civilization.

    From The Animatrix, Neal Gaiman’s Goliath, and across the three movies, I recall that the machines did try putting humans in paradise. Their goal was to use human flesh minds to perform calculations they could not, so, to an extent, if the human could be tricked into thinking they were in paradise with a small fraction of their mind, the machines could occupy the rest (presumably to control fusion reactors, but mostly to augment the machines’ cognitive abilities). The narrative implied that human minds consistently rejected utopias and paradises, spawning rogue entities like Neo and Trinity who possessed destructive abilities the machines couldn’t comprehend but could empirically measure.

    Basically, human cognitive abilities most valued by the machines also were inextricably tied to chaotic destruction of whatever medium the humans occupied. Like how uranium is useful for generating electricity but turns its container radioactive, melts down if unmoderated, and can create thermonuclear weapons.




  • It’s better to compare yourself to a version that is successful together with your neighbors. At that point, you realize the stereotypical understanding of “success” is equivalent to “beating down your competitors until you alone stand above them”. Shared success is indistinguishable from being ordinary.


  • This reminds me of the campsite rule but applied globally: “Leave the world a better place than you found it.”

    If your ethos is to own and manage as many housing units as possible, you’re not going to improve them since, paradoxically, leaving the world a better place doesn’t help grow your enterprise. On the other hand, if every housing unit is managed exclusively and only by a single local person who doesn’t split their attention, then that person has a personal incentive to improve their home since they suffer the direct consequences of neglecting their possessions.











  • How frequently are images generated/modified by diffusion models uploaded to Wikimedia Commons? I can wrap my head around evaluating cited sources for notability, but I don’t know where to start determining the repute of photographs. So many images Wikipedia articles use are taken by seemingly random people not associated with any organization.