R3qn65's recent activity
-
Comment on The US campaign to turn healthy people into Alzheimer’s patients in ~health.mental
-
Comment on A start-up aiming to make geothermal energy mainstream goes public in ~enviro
R3qn65 LinkThat is awesome. Super cool to see companies pushing the boundaries.That is awesome. Super cool to see companies pushing the boundaries.
-
Comment on Gemini 3.2 Flash rumored to hit 92% of GPT-5.5 performance at lower cost in ~tech
R3qn65 Link ParentAll the paid models are close enough to one another that there's not really a wrong choice. That's especially true since you're (presumably) going to be using it for everyday tasks and not...All the paid models are close enough to one another that there's not really a wrong choice. That's especially true since you're (presumably) going to be using it for everyday tasks and not something like coding or mathematical reasoning.
Personally I would recommend you follow in your niece's footsteps and get Claude. But any of the paid models will be just fine for your purposes.
To answer your question about benchmarks - not really useful to regular people. Not directly, anyway. It matters because it has follow-on effects, but for the purposes of this discussion it doesn't matter.
-
Comment on The US campaign to turn healthy people into Alzheimer’s patients in ~health.mental
R3qn65 Link ParentCharles pillar wrote this article as well. Maybe you knew that - couldn't quite tell from your comment.Charles pillar wrote this article as well. Maybe you knew that - couldn't quite tell from your comment.
-
Comment on Why is it so hard to get an ADHD diagnosis? How do you find a good psychologist? in ~health.mental
R3qn65 LinkI'm not a psychiatrist and cannot judge whether you have ADHD, anxiety, or neither. I'm also not Romanian and have no idea what social stigmas there might be that could influence your doctors. I...I'm not a psychiatrist and cannot judge whether you have ADHD, anxiety, or neither. I'm also not Romanian and have no idea what social stigmas there might be that could influence your doctors. I do want to note, though, that feeling like you want to do something and being unable to can 100% be a symptom of anxiety. Anxiety is not always a state of worry at the front of your mind. It can manifest in other ways too (avoidance, paralysis, etc.)
It sounds like you had a really frustrating experience and I sympathize. I think it's worth at least considering whether anxiety might be involved here, though.
-
Comment on The US campaign to turn healthy people into Alzheimer’s patients in ~health.mental
R3qn65 Link ParentOh, it's fine, you're completely right. "It's more complicated than that" was my implied point and you helped make it more explicit.Oh, it's fine, you're completely right. "It's more complicated than that" was my implied point and you helped make it more explicit.
-
Comment on The US campaign to turn healthy people into Alzheimer’s patients in ~health.mental
R3qn65 Link ParentI'm not trying to disprove the HSP hypothesis. My point is that you're committing the exact same error that you criticize in the B amyloid theory: oversimplifying, coming up with theoretical...I'm not trying to disprove the HSP hypothesis. My point is that you're committing the exact same error that you criticize in the B amyloid theory: oversimplifying, coming up with theoretical causal mechanisms to explain an observational effect, and generalizing from quite limited studies. The HSP theory may well have elements of truth, but if so it needs to be experimentally tested and we need to be able to answer why there's so much Alzheimer's in populations that already sauna heavily, in exactly the same way that the B amyloid theory needs to be able to answer why some people have huge amounts of B amyloid buildup but no Alzheimer's.
-
Comment on The US campaign to turn healthy people into Alzheimer’s patients in ~health.mental
R3qn65 (edited )Link ParentYes, of course. I'm not trying to disprove the HSP hypothesis. My point is that it's more complicated than "the B amyloid hypothesis is false... But we've figured it out how to fix it! It's saunaing!"Yes, of course. I'm not trying to disprove the HSP hypothesis. My point is that it's more complicated than "the B amyloid hypothesis is false... But we've figured it out how to fix it! It's saunaing!"
-
Comment on The US campaign to turn healthy people into Alzheimer’s patients in ~health.mental
R3qn65 (edited )Link ParentI think a lot of people are conflating "there's more to the story than just B amyloid" (certainly true) with "the amyloid hypothesis is debunked!" (probably overstated). More specifically, that's...I think a lot of people are conflating "there's more to the story than just B amyloid" (certainly true) with "the amyloid hypothesis is debunked!" (probably overstated).
Conversely, I was surprised to learn that the production of heat shock proteins from high temperature exposure is correlated with lowered Alzheimer's incidence.
More specifically, that's a theoretical mechanism. What we can actually say is that saunaing (among certain populations, etc etc) is correlated with lower AD incidence, and HSP is a reasonably plausible theory suggesting why. But exercise is also linked to lower AD incidence, and so the benefit of sauna might just be the elevated heart rate and have nothing to do with HSP at all. The evidence supporting the B amyloid hypothesis - even accounting for the questionable stuff - is much, much stronger than the evidence supporting the "it's all HSP!" hypothesis.
I know you were being a bit glib, but if the treatment for AD was just "sauna!" we would've already figured it out, because nobody in all of Finland would have AD. And they do. Ironically, in fact, Finns suffer from AD at disproportionately high rates - the highest mortality rate from AD in the world.
-
Comment on How I feel about LLM (AI) writing in ~tech
R3qn65 Link ParentI don't really disagree with anything you wrote, but as a small note of hope, I don't think that most people are fine or even indifferent. It's more that it doesn't take much effort to prompt and...But I guess most people are fine replacing that with homogeneous undifferentiated slop.
I don't really disagree with anything you wrote, but as a small note of hope, I don't think that most people are fine or even indifferent. It's more that it doesn't take much effort to prompt and post AI slop, so the people doing that can easily overwhelm any forum's immune system. Though... Yeah, people don't actually read past the headline. That's not new with AI, but it's definitely worse now.
-
Comment on When Richard Dawkins met Claude in ~health.mental
R3qn65 Link ParentCan you expand on what you mean by this? My understanding is that even researchers in the field consider LLMs a black box. See for example this paper, which has been cited over 1400 times....Because I understand the algorithms being used?
Can you expand on what you mean by this? My understanding is that even researchers in the field consider LLMs a black box. See for example this paper, which has been cited over 1400 times. Obviously that doesn't mean that nobody understands anything about how LLMs work. Like you, I could give a reasonably detailed explanation of the vector math and so on. But there are clearly elements that we don't understand, much like humans can explain how the human brain works in fantastic detail but the gestalt still escapes us.
-
Comment on From neat lawns to wild havens: how No Mow May is transforming England’s gardens in ~enviro
R3qn65 Link ParentI think we're on the way there! It's increasingly common to see nice suburban houses with intentionally wild (but still shaped) yards, whereas even a few years ago that would've been unthinkable.It would be nice if that trend could be bucked, and there was more of a movement to let your property harbor natural species while also caring for it. I think that would go a long way towards breaking the perfectly mowed lawn expectation.
I think we're on the way there! It's increasingly common to see nice suburban houses with intentionally wild (but still shaped) yards, whereas even a few years ago that would've been unthinkable.
-
Comment on A Dialogue on Freedom in ~humanities
R3qn65 Link ParentI should've asked first what you find the comic convincing of. If it's that Nozick specifically was wrong, then okay we agree on everything. I agree he was an extreme libertarian whose absolutist...I should've asked first what you find the comic convincing of. If it's that Nozick specifically was wrong, then okay we agree on everything. I agree he was an extreme libertarian whose absolutist philosophy can be challenged with the property monster. What did you find it particularly convincing of?
-
Comment on A Dialogue on Freedom in ~humanities
R3qn65 Link ParentBut those wars are being fought by states, not private individuals. Skybrian was pretty clearly talking about land ownership in terms of people, not countries, no? He also never mentioned natural...But those wars are being fought by states, not private individuals. Skybrian was pretty clearly talking about land ownership in terms of people, not countries, no? He also never mentioned natural resources at all... Or war, for that matter.
-
Comment on A Dialogue on Freedom in ~humanities
R3qn65 Link ParentSee, I would argue that philosophically and in practice they're identical and it's only legally that they're distinct. One of your proposals suggested that all infrastructure should be controlled...Not really. Although "own", "control" and "decide how to use, if at all" can seem like exactly synonymous they are not. (We are talking philosophically here, in everyday life I could make the opposite point to make a point.)
See, I would argue that philosophically and in practice they're identical and it's only legally that they're distinct. One of your proposals suggested that all infrastructure should be controlled by a democratic institution, right? If that institution is controlling and apportioning all land, they "own" it in any real sense other than perhaps legally. (I'd also point out that every large-scale analogue to this in human history has failed rather catastrophically).
There are numerous proposals laying around
Well, sure, but I meant in the actual argument presented. LukeZaz argued that was the point and I missed it, but I disagree. Perhaps they were right.
-
Comment on A Dialogue on Freedom in ~humanities
R3qn65 LinkThanks for sharing. I love these comics, but hadn't seen this one before. I am extremely pro-property rights, by tildes standards, so keep that in mind as framing for the following commentary. I...Thanks for sharing. I love these comics, but hadn't seen this one before.
I am extremely pro-property rights, by tildes standards, so keep that in mind as framing for the following commentary.
I don't think the property monster idea quite works. The thought experiment for the utility monster works because utilitarianism is genuinely trying to make universal claims about morals and ethics. The universal part is key, because if you can show that there are scenarios under which the philosophy fails, that calls its general applicability into question. By contrast, only the most unhinged sovereign citizen would take such an absolutist view on property rights that they would say that there should be no limitations ever, so constructing a similar hypothetical doesn't disprove the themes in the same way.
The author writes that we should wonder, then, why we accept smaller versions of this scenario. But I don't think that logically holds either. You could construct almost any scenario of something that's fine in moderation but becomes abhorrent when taken to an extreme. ("The government puts people in jail. What if they put everyone in jail? It'd be horrible. So why is it okay if some people are jailed?")
I think maybe the the biggest difference is that utilitarianism is theoretical but we actually have to deal with property in the real world. What I mean is that I think theoretical takedowns of philosophical precepts, with no alternatives, is fine because it's all thought experiments. But in the real world you've got to present an alternative. Okay, sure, people who own property could have power over those who don't. But somebody's got to own it, whether it be individuals or a board appointed by the state or whatever, so what's the actual proposal to make a system that's better?
-
Comment on US will revoke passports for parents who owe child support in ~society
R3qn65 Link ParentI went looking and couldn't find any stats on how many Americans have US passports but no other forms of ID. Intuitively that number seems like it would be quite small to me, but I can't say for sure.I went looking and couldn't find any stats on how many Americans have US passports but no other forms of ID. Intuitively that number seems like it would be quite small to me, but I can't say for sure.
-
Comment on US will revoke passports for parents who owe child support in ~society
R3qn65 Link ParentYes and no. It's a pretty complicated question, actually. The US Supreme Court held in 1964 that "the right to travel at home and abroad is an important aspect of liberty of which a citizen cannot...Yes and no. It's a pretty complicated question, actually. The US Supreme Court held in 1964 that "the right to travel at home and abroad is an important aspect of liberty of which a citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law," citing the fifth amendment of the US Constitution. So from that standpoint, yes, it's quite literally a restriction of rights. But the government restricts rights constantly as part of its duties, and the key part is the latter phrase: without the due process of law. This new policy does conform to existing laws, whereas in 1964 State was rescinding passports for much more arbitrary reasons.
Child support in particular is something that American courts have penalized quite strongly - it's one of only a very few situations that can lead to your wages being garnished for instance. So there's a precedent as well for fairly punitive (but non-jail) measures.
Add to that that "you didn't pay child support" is not some arbitrary federal charge they can slap you with - it requires judgement by a local judge, etc. It's kind of a big deal. And it's a certainty that a good number of people owing $100,000 in child support who are outside of America left specifically to avoid paying.
Overall, I think it's a reasonable policy. It conforms to existing laws, there's precedent, and it wouldn't be easy to expand it arbitrarily to people the government just doesn't like.
-
Comment on Why so many people are going "no contact" with their parents in ~life
R3qn65 (edited )Link ParentI'm not upset at you, to be clear. I thought (and still think) that parts of your comment were unfair and said so. That's all. I can see how I came across that way. To try to clarify, I didn't...the person you appear to be actually upset at - me.
I'm not upset at you, to be clear. I thought (and still think) that parts of your comment were unfair and said so. That's all.
In the meanwhile here you are saying that my world view is completely invalid - It's just "my own history and baggage" - which is something that I find offensive. You might as well tell me I'm living in a fantasy land.
I can see how I came across that way. To try to clarify, I didn't mean history and baggage as an inherently negative thing - and certainly not that it doesn't exist. It's more that all of us have certain trigger or iceberg topics, usually rooted in our past, that cause us to react unreasonably strongly. It's not invalid to feel that way. It is unfair to put it onto other people. To wit, I find you to generally be a thoughtful and empathetic commenter. I think that you would probably usually agree, if it weren't such a personally sensitive topic, that neither BeardyHat nor anybody reading his post did anything even remotely in the realm of endorsing child abuse.
-
Comment on Why so many people are going "no contact" with their parents in ~life
R3qn65 Link ParentOh, please. I categorically reject your argument. Sharing feelings is not inherently noble; it is not inherently reasonable; it is not inherently fair. It can be all of those things, but "that's...I think your own emotions are clouding your ability to interpret them.
Oh, please.
I categorically reject your argument. Sharing feelings is not inherently noble; it is not inherently reasonable; it is not inherently fair. It can be all of those things, but "that's just how I feel" is not an unimpeachable defense. If someone gives you an exemplary label for this post, it wouldn't be reasonable or fair for me to say "I'm sure you're a nice person but that label makes me feel like it's a glowing endorsement of racism." That is true even if that is genuinely how I feel, because nothing you said even hinted at racism - it'd be my own history and baggage making me feel that way, not you.
Obviously I'm not saying that no feelings are ever valid. Clearly. But I think it's a "reasonable standard" type of thing. If I'm being an asshole and you say "you're making me feel bad," that's clearly valid. But this was clearly not that.
The most dangerous theories always seem to have marvelous explanatory power on the surface, but often fall apart at closer examination. For example, it would be easy to assume that the Bolivian rainforest is hot because that would seem to fit our theory so nicely. But I might suggest you Google the average temperatures in the Bolivian rainforest. Not even close to the hottest place on earth and in fact it's kind of chilly through winter. Texas is much hotter. Southern Spain is much hotter. Southern Italy. Most of Pakistan. All of the middle east. Etc etc. All of these places are much hotter and yet have vastly more Alzheimer's than the tribes in Bolivia.
Same thing with the guy who worked in the engine room. Sure, it seems to fit, but what if his engine room history is completely unrelated and it just sounds good? What if he's got some sort of genetic mutation that's the actual cause of his resistance? It's the same potentially with the saunaing Finns, and basically everything else.