The ADA made it illegal to discriminate against job seekers for health conditions and ObamaCare made it illegal to base cover and rates on pre-existing conditions.
What are the chances those bills last long in the current administration and supreme court?
And yet, if you want life insurance you can’t get it with a bunch of pre existing conditions. And you can be discriminated against as a job seeker as long as they don’t make it obvious.
A fun tendency is that Claude kept getting distracted by topics of secrecy, conspiracy, and hidden systems - as if the task itself summoned a Foucault’s Pendulum mindset.
It's all fun and game 'till someone loses an eye/mind/even-tenuous-connection-to-reality.
Edit: I'd mention that the themes Claude finds qualify as important stuff imo. But they're all pretty grim and it's a bit problematic focusing on them for a long period. Also, they are often the grimmest spin things that are well known.
I support people taking antidepressants if it helps them.
But I have to say the "chemical imbalance" theory either means no more than "depression responds to an antidepressant (sometimes)" or it is false/meaningless. Neither neurologists nor psychologists have a sufficiently detailed understanding of the workings of the brain to make such a claim.
Again, I'm glad drugs work for you. I would note that there three ways drugs can go for people; working with few problems, not working, working but with significant physical and/or psychological side-effects. Especially, taking any substance daily for the rest of one's life can stress the organs responsible for digesting/processing regardless of whether than substance is otherwise a great fix.
So I think we need to look beyond a glib "this fixes it for everyone" rhetoric even if this fixes it for you (and yeah, some of my friends should at least drugs, I'll admit).
The text definitely the "jump from dramatic crescendo to dramatic crescendo" quality of certain LLM texts. If you read closely, it also has adjective choice that's more for dramatic than appropriate to the circumstances involves (a quality of LLM texts it also helpfully explains).
I don't know if this proves it's an LLM text or whether that style is simply spilling out everywhere.
I don't think "good moderation or not" really touches what was happening with SO.
I joined SO early and it had a "gamified" interface that I actually found fun. Putting in effort and such I able to slowly gain karma.
The problem was as the site scaled, the competition to answer a given question became more and more intense and that made it miserable. I left at that point but I think a lot people stayed with dynamic that was extremely unhealthy. (and the quality of accepted questions declined also).
With all this, the moderation criteria didn't have to directly change, it just had to fail to deal with the effects that were happening.
Yeah, as far as I know, to understand video formats, you need to understand encode-decode process, how film/video editor operate normally (keeping in mind film/video editing has levels from $100s to way beyond me), history, how optics and cameras work, etc. Then particular choices and confusions can be understood.
This indeed just seems to jump-in in the middle and give a bunch very specific recommendation. I have no idea if they're good or bad recommendations but this doesn't seem like the way to teach good procedures.
I think the reason Russia today is relentless anti-West is rooted the post-Soviet era in many ways characterized by (the alcoholic) Boris Yeltsin. Wikipedia gives the summary: "Yeltsin oversaw the transition of Russia's command economy into a capitalist market economy by implementing economic shock therapy, market exchange rate of the ruble, nationwide privatization, and lifting of price controls. Economic downturn, volatility, and inflation ensued. Amid the economic shift, a small number of oligarchs obtained most of the national property and wealth, while international monopolies dominated the market." and I'd add millions of people died (not an exageration).
The Putin regime began with Putin using military force to arrest any disloyal oligarchs while formulating his anti-Western ideology. But sequence of event explains why most Russians today have zero faith/interest in joining the Western World.
Russia is anti-west because traitors Gorbachev and Yeltsin (who was indeed an alcoholic) sold the country to the West for nothing, for promises that we would be treated as equals that were never kept. As you can see in many comments here (and on other sites such as Reddit this is more prominent), West consider Russian people subhumans. Something that Hitler and others said openly before, and this wave of Nazism is becoming stronger now again.
Country was destroyed, markets were destroyed, industries were destroyed. Hundreds of thousands died in ethnical conflicts, hundreds of thousands died from hunger. It was all a huge mistake and I hope we'll never repeat it.
> Country was destroyed, markets were destroyed, industries were destroyed.
And yet somehow, mysteriously, the exact same shock therapy that Russia couldn't handle produced a thriving and prosperous Poland, Czechoslovakia, etc.
> for promises that we would be treated as equals that were never kept
Russia has an economy roughly the size of Benelux, and it is treated exactly as such. The problem is that the Russians have a perpetual and hilarious delusion that they're an equal to the United States. Russia can barely compete with individual US states, let alone the US itself. California alone has a larger economy than the entire Russian Federation. Texas alone has a larger economy than the entire Russian Federation.
In fact, Russia has a roughly comparable economy to Canada, which no one thinks is even remotely a power equal to the US.
Russia is treated fairly. The problem is that Russia has delusions of grandeur, so 'fairly' is not good enough. They feel slighted by being a 'mere' Canada. And instead of doing what the Chinese did, building up so their power matches their aspirations, they just awkwardly gnaw at their neighbours instead. And then they act all surprised when everyone correctly describes them as a bully and bands together for collective security.
(But of course none of Russia's behaviour is actually aimed at getting other countries to respect them, that's just a regime narrative intended to distract the Russian people from their falling living standards as Putin and his cronies rob Russia blind. The more internationally isolated Russia gets, the more indispensable Putin can pretend to be.)
A sound banker, alas, is not one who foresees danger and avoids it, but one who, when he is ruined, is ruined in a conventional and orthodox way along with his fellows, so that no one can really blame him. JM Keynes
The thing is that as far as I can tell, a ZKP of age involves a state or similar attestor to issue an ID/waller that can be querried for age without revealing identity.
But attestor has to have certainty about the age of the person it issues IDs to. That raises obvious questions.
What states are going to accept private attestors? What states are going accept other states as attestors? What state won't start using its issues ID/Wallet for any purpose it sees fit?
This system seems likely to devolve national Internets only populated by those IDs. That can all happen with ZKPs not being broken.
What are the chances those bills last long in the current administration and supreme court?
reply