pete_68 t1_jawe21p wrote

It depends what you use to determine speed. Body lengths are a way of comparing speed of different organisms. By this measure, the Southern California mite is the fastest with speeds in excess of 300 body lengths per second.

That would be like a human going about Mach 2.


pete_68 t1_ja5f6kc wrote

We're not going to make it because, as a species, we don't use forward thinking. We've known about climate change since at least the 70s, at least. A large percentage of the population refused to believe it was a reality. Many still do. In all that time, we've done, effectively nothing. I mean, we've done some stuff, but the impact has been little more than to kick the can down the road a few years.

We live as if we have unlimited clean energy with the general thinking being, "we'll get it eventually," and maybe we will, but maybe we won't. In the meantime the planet is turning into a shithole. Look at all the plastic in the oceans, all the garbage in the rivers. You're not supposed to eat more than 2 servings of albacore tuna a week because of the mercury levels. How long until you can't eat any fish (assuming we don't completely wipe them all out)?

We sit around and breed out of control and fight over resources instead of using our brains, and keeping our population at a reasonable size that would allow everyone to have plenty of resources and for the world to be able to recover from the damage we do.


pete_68 t1_ja34wfm wrote

Thanks. It's terrifying and we're not 100% sure we're going to be able to do it. We're going to give it a shot, though. And if it works out, it works out and if it doesn't, we'll find some other way to help out.

As part of this process, we've spoken to a lot of foster families and found that they need a lot of support in other ways because there's just so much involved in fostering over taking care of a biological child. There are usually additional doctors appointments, therapists (psychological, occupational, etc), visitation with biological parents, etc.

They need help running errands, making meals, finding clothes, etc. So if we find that fostering's just not meant for us, we'll try to help out in those areas. I love to cook, so cooking up lots of good meals that can be frozen and reheated and in the oven, fresh bread, etc, are things I'd love doing. We could both help with the other things as well.

Fostering is hard. Fortunately, this training gives very realistic expectations because when we first started, my wife, I think, kind of idealized it and this has really kind of opened her eyes as to how hard it is.


pete_68 t1_ja0lfmb wrote

Reply to comment by Lord0fHats in Prompt engineers demand by currency100t

No. Prompting is a skill like WRITING is a skill. People who can't write good prompts get shitty result. People who know how to write good prompts get good results. Half the people I see posting on here "Chat GPT can't do this or can't do that," don't know how to write a decent prompt.

And again, someone show me how you're going to prompt ChatGPT to write HTML and CSS to build something novel, with the same complexity as Google News, without confusing ChatGPT and actually getting something resembling what you want. I challenge anyone here to post that prompt.

Because I've done it. I know how hard it is to find the language that isn't confusing to the AI. You have to be careful about using words like "it" to make sure that the AI knows which of the 50 things you've previously discussed is the thing you're referring to.

All the people downvoting me haven't done anything more than trivial prompts with ChatGPT. Anyone who's done anything of any real complexity knows how hard it can be.


pete_68 t1_ja0ihhy wrote

Paper is generally made from fast growing softwood trees like southern pines, loblolly pines, spruces and firs, grown on tree farms specifically for paper making. Not the ideal trees for carbon sequestration, as trees go.

For that you want slower growing hardwood trees, particularly trees like black walnut, silver maple, sycamores, etc.


pete_68 t1_j9zppf4 wrote

My wife and I are currently going through training to become foster parents and there's a lot about food insecurity and other food issues. It's honestly terribly depressing. And thinking about it, I can't think of a single obese person that I know well who had a decent home life growing up, so this seems to track with my anecdotal experience.


pete_68 t1_j9zcztc wrote

"Archive" your life through your actions and the impact you have on peoples' lives. This is just narcissism. You have to think you're pretty special to think that anyone other than your close family would be interested in something like this.

Reminds me of the time my dad (a little bit of a narcissist) said in a phone call, "I didn't realize how interesting I am." lol.


pete_68 t1_j9yxzvn wrote

I think there will be a demand for it. You need to be able to write to a certain degree of detail. I disagree with u/StrawInANeedleStack in this regard because until AI can read you're mind, you're going to have to be able to think through the problem and be able to pull out all the relevant details. That's not something a lot of people have an innate ability to do.

Prompting is a skill that will require development and again, until they can read our minds, it's always going to be a skill.

That said, I think it will be mixed with your job. If you're an ad writer, you'll be an ad writer with prompt expertise, or a software developer with prompt expertise, etc...

And I'll offer an example: Try to describe the layout of a web page like Google News, in detail, so ChatGPT can reproduce the layout in HTML and CSS. It's a lot of freaking words with tremendous detail and describing it in a way that isn't confusing for the AI is incredibly difficult. Ask me how I know.


pete_68 t1_j9rln9b wrote

>I heard that with things such as brain/computer interfaces, neural implants, and mind uploading we can delete memories,

You heard wrong. It's science fiction.

We have no real idea how memories are stored, beyond a fairly basic level. We know that the hippocampus is involved in storing memories and if you destroy it, you can't create new memories, but memories aren't stored in a folder somewhere in your brain. You can't just go in an delete a memory. They're stored throughout your brain (edit: Specifically the neocortex, but this is a pretty extensive area of the brain). That's why you can remember smells and sounds and sights and the way things feel, because they're stored in all those parts of the brain where those sensations are experienced. And they're interweaved with each other. You couldn't destroy one without destroying others.

This is not something that we're anywhere close to being competent to messing with.


pete_68 t1_j9dmim6 wrote

The code uses logic. But ChatGPT doesn't understand logic and can't be logical. Again, it's not very intelligent. I cant sometimes answer logical questions correctly, but not because it's being logical, but because the logical response is what's calculated as the next correct words, because of what was in the training data. You can teach it facts, but you can't teach it logic.

Which isn't to say one day it or one of its successors won't be logical. But today, it is not.


pete_68 t1_j9albwb wrote

>...but I haven't dug into the topic much before.
>I think all of us should not consider AI as simple helping tools

So you haven't looked into it, but you're here to tell everyone who has how they should think about it?

And we stopped evolving intelligence when we started putting labels on things like mattresses, telling people not to smoke in bed, or hair dryers and toasters, telling people not to use them in the shower. We stopped evolving intelligence when we started enacting helmet laws and seatbelt laws.

When we protect stupid people from doing themselves in, we're bypassing survival of the fittest and dumbing down the species.

And more than anything, we probably stopped evolving intelligence when people started watching TV instead of reading books.

A study in Norway suggests that between 1962 and 1991, IQs dropped by about 3%.

A separate studies across multiple countries suggests that, between 1975 and 2020, they dropped as much as 13.5%.

AI isn't the cause of it.

These bots aren't intelligent. They're highly educated and incredibly stupid.

Me: Is the letter E in the word Red?

ChatGPT: No, the letter "E" is not in the word "Red."

Me: What letters are in the word Red

ChatGPT: The letters in the word "Red" are "R," "E," and "D."

These things are just fancy calculators. They calculate the next right word. Nothing more, nothing less. They don't do logic. They're not intelligent.


pete_68 t1_j90211c wrote

It says "up to half". This is kind of a tough number to get a handle on and it depends on how you look at it and what time frame. At this moment, of the people who have had COVID, only 11% currently have long COVID symptoms and an additional 17% have HAD long COVID at some point, so that's 28%. Most people who get long COVID have their symptoms resolve within a year.

But in June of 22, that number was 35% (19% current 16% ever).

So it may be based on a specific time period during a certain outbreak.

But again, the vast majority of long COVID cases resolve within a year.

Source: Kaiser Family Foundation

Edit: I forgot to mention, there's also been some discussion that a large number of long COVID cases go unreported. My own daughter had long COVID and we never reported it. It was mild and it eventually resolved itself, but we never took her to a doctor for it, so it never ended up in the stats, so that might be factored in as well.


pete_68 t1_j8yw8k2 wrote

This seems silly. Of course dogs are going to match our actions more than a wolf. Dogs evolved to be likeable to us. That's how they got rewarded with food. The ones who do things we liked got rewarded with food and were more fit to survive and breed. 130,000 years of that and food is no longer required as the reward. They've evolved to want to please us.


pete_68 t1_j8y3eh6 wrote

>Humans seem quite dead set in a capitalist-centric future...

The irony of this is that it's incompatible with a static or declining population. This is why China's economy is about to pop. Their population dropped by 100 million last year. Japan and Russia have this problem as well, though China is in far worse shape because of the 1-child policy.

It'll happen to the US and Europe a while after and then it'll happen everywhere else.

Market economies don't like static or declining populations.