kacey's recent activity
-
Comment on (book impressions) Mudgirls Manifesto: Handbuilt Homes, Hand Crafted Lives in ~design
-
Comment on (book impressions) Mudgirls Manifesto: Handbuilt Homes, Hand Crafted Lives in ~design
kacey Link Parentnp! A lot of BC is really remote. Like, boat access only, and the next closest town is a half day's sailing remote. And the bits that're further away from the coast get even more isolated! So even...The one thing I wonder is how they evade local building codes, especially as they become publicized?
np!
The one thing I wonder is how they evade local building codes, especially as they become publicized?
A lot of BC is really remote. Like, boat access only, and the next closest town is a half day's sailing remote. And the bits that're further away from the coast get even more isolated! So even if one were to sic the building inspectors onto a structure, there's effectively zero chance that they'll carve time out of their schedule to go track it down ...
Just doing some cursory research, though, Reddit claims that there's been more of a crackdown in recent years, but it's unclear whether that's from folks living in previously out-of-reach areas experiencing the population boom we've felt or a genuine push for greater enforcement. That said -- and I don't support this at all, btw -- the book suggests that one's neighbour is often the source of complaints, and that inspectors only come in once requested. So they advise being friendly with your neighbours as a strategy to evade building code enforcement 😅
(edit) and thank you for that book recommendation, btw! I'll try to track down a copy 😊
-
Comment on The tantalizing possibility of locating consciousness in the brain in ~science
kacey Link ParentOh, also agreed that it's (probably) an emergent property! I think I joked as much in a different comment here; the idea that a single section of the brain is the "seat of consciousness" seems as...Oh, also agreed that it's (probably) an emergent property! I think I joked as much in a different comment here; the idea that a single section of the brain is the "seat of consciousness" seems as though it does not pass the sniff test.
However, as a counterpoint! As far as I understand it, all of physics is an emergent property of some universal parameters (fine structure constant, relative strength of the weak vs strong nuclear forces, etc.), and we're working on the formulae which fall out from that (although a grand universal theory is still beyond us). Chemistry is a further emergent property of physics, in that complex reactions can occur between atoms in particular environments -- and speaking of which, biology could be seen as an emergent field from chemistry. And so on and so forth.
So I don't feel that emergence necessarily precludes prediction, but I'm not a scientific philosopher, therefore that's an uneducated opinion 😅 personally, I agree that we're unlikely to stumble over a theory of consciousness that is predictive, but we've figured out stranger things? So I feel that it's difficult to rule out out of hand.
-
Comment on The tantalizing possibility of locating consciousness in the brain in ~science
kacey Link ParentAah, understood! So I think the goal of any theory of consciousness is to model it at an abstract level: to be able to make testable claims about it, and to reasonably model all existing behaviour...Aah, understood! So I think the goal of any theory of consciousness is to model it at an abstract level: to be able to make testable claims about it, and to reasonably model all existing behaviour for it. Furthermore, an ideal model should be simpler (for some definition of simplicity) than a competing model.
From that perspective -- although we can both agree that it's all just math in the end! -- I expect that the pursuit of a "theory of consciousness" (so to speak) is not incompatible with the notion that we're squishy computers in the end? Just that that model is more complex and less predictive than most proposed models of consciousness (although I'll carve out the ones which believe all things in the universe -- rocks, stars, hydrogen gas -- are conscious. That one ... doesn't predict much).
-
Comment on The tantalizing possibility of locating consciousness in the brain in ~science
kacey Link ParentMakes sense! I'd just upvote and nod in agreement, but it always feels awkward to do so 😅Makes sense! I'd just upvote and nod in agreement, but it always feels awkward to do so 😅
-
Comment on The tantalizing possibility of locating consciousness in the brain in ~science
kacey Link Parent(just as an interjection -- since neural networks are universal function approximators, one could reasonably expect them to approximate the outward behaviour of any function, including that of the...(just as an interjection -- since neural networks are universal function approximators, one could reasonably expect them to approximate the outward behaviour of any function, including that of the human brain, but also like climate systems, graphics rendering pipelines, video game matchmaking algos, etc. It feels like drawing a conclusion about the structure of any of those modelled systems from the architecture of a neural network would either speak to a similarity that underlies all of them, or that it's spurious. Imo tho)
-
Comment on The tantalizing possibility of locating consciousness in the brain in ~science
kacey (edited )Link ParentAah, gotcha! Not that I expect this to be convincing, so instead -- in case it's interesting (and you wish to discuss further) -- I'd like to share how I've come to think of this? Although please...Aah, gotcha! Not that I expect this to be convincing, so instead -- in case it's interesting (and you wish to discuss further) -- I'd like to share how I've come to think of this? Although please feel free to ignore it, as matters such as these are often quite near and dear, and I don't want to assume to critique your position -- just wanted to talk about my own as it's the general topic of discussion atm.
So, thought experiment: is it actually, like, possible to predict the billiards balls, or is it so cosmically beyond us as not to be of import to us mortals? For instance, it's impossible to know both the position and momentum of individual atomic particles, as the measurement of one necessarily affects the other. That's probably meaningless on a day to day basis, but at the scale of the universe, it adds up! And even if it were possible, the raw power necessary to simulate a second universe faster than the first (in order to predict its behaviour) feels unlikely to exist.
Thus, if prediction is mathematically possible, but both technically and theoretically impossible, is there a meaningful distinction between a universe where predetermination exists but we can never know it, and a universe where humans have free will (ie some sort of extra-physical willpower force)? If one's perception of one's actions is that they are chosen of their own volition, and it is effectively impossible to prove otherwise, the question feels moot.
(as you note though it opens the possibility that humans we perceive of as monstrous are such, not due to their own desires or choices, but due to circumstances outside their control. And tbh that conclusion is what drives my morality and empathy, since the desire -- if not the means or ability -- to better ourselves seems intrinsic. And supporting that feels morally good)
-
Comment on The tantalizing possibility of locating consciousness in the brain in ~science
kacey Link Parent(interjecting; apologies) Apologies, I'm not what definition of free will you're working with, so it's hard to comment much, but I'm not sure how lacking it would necessarily preclude the...(interjecting; apologies)
Apologies, I'm not what definition of free will you're working with, so it's hard to comment much, but I'm not sure how lacking it would necessarily preclude the existence of morality ... put differently, how would one even distinguish between a free and not free choice? A lot of our lives are not perfectly under control -- much as I will it, I can't change some fundamental facts about my life, or my world -- but I chose what I had for lunch (of a limited selection of what was available in the pantry).
-
Comment on The tantalizing possibility of locating consciousness in the brain in ~science
kacey (edited )Link Parentnp np! I read through your response to PegalusSeptim; thank you for the quick summary! I rather enjoy this field as well, but it's been a while since I had a good debate about it :3 Fwiw, I...np np! I read through your response to PegalusSeptim; thank you for the quick summary! I rather enjoy this field as well, but it's been a while since I had a good debate about it :3
Fwiw, I totally agree with the subset of your take, which is that consciousness is a purely physical phenomenon: we're not embodied by some mystical life force granting personhood, as distinct from all other creatures on Earth. That said, maybe I have some slight disagreements with some portrayals of the proposed method by which consciousness arises? In particular:
- it seems like it might have a tough time describing attention? We appear to have a limit to the number of patterns that can be attended to at a given time, which implies that some sort of perceiver/processing bottleneck must exist. For example: it's possible to overload people with stimuli that would, individually, be tolerable (e.g. task them to perform a visual task, then an auditory task, then both simultaneously. Then, have them do the simultaneous task, but only attend to a single type of stimuli. Relative results should near universally be worse for the combined task than either individual task, and the focused attention task should land in the middle);
- broadly, language seems difficult to encode as a lookup table? People seem capable of producing effectively unique (in all of history -- choose any 6-gram from my comment and it should hopefully be unique 😅), well structured, nearly infinite output -- which seems like it would imply an infinite size lookup table, or else, a thought process more complex than a simple, one pass query-response system. Er, the latter implying that consciousness could be hiding there;
- I might've missed something, but I'm not sure it touches upon how the intuitive notion of selfhood and consciousness seem to have arisen so frequently throughout history? That we seem to have notions of experience and an internal world, and whatnot.
Phew that was a bit longer than I intended XD it's a fun subject, but I appear to have blown my evening re-reading the Wikipedia article on consciousness to attempt to contribute to the conversation. It's a girthy article, but there's a bunch of good work in there by philosophers of old! ... by which apparently I mean the 80s ...
I'd note that my fav from back in the day (Global Workspace Theory) is still around, so if you're interested in reading about an alternative perspective, it would do a better job of explaining it than I!
-
Comment on The tantalizing possibility of locating consciousness in the brain in ~science
kacey Link ParentJust as an aside -- since I agree with your comment, and appreciate your shared insight into these conversations! -- I find the notion of finding the "consciousness centre" of the brain to be...Just as an aside -- since I agree with your comment, and appreciate your shared insight into these conversations! -- I find the notion of finding the "consciousness centre" of the brain to be terribly amusing. Afaik, most of what we know about neurology comes from people being horrifically injured, animals being horrifically injured, or fMRI studies, so the logical implication of finding the "consciousness lobe" would be that one could simply sever it to create an unfeeling zombie. Which seems unlikely, but also a premise that Black Mirror should examine 😅
(iirc someone here wrote a short story about a similar topic, earlier)
-
Comment on The tantalizing possibility of locating consciousness in the brain in ~science
kacey Link ParentQ: may I ask what your definition of consciousness is? For example, do you define it in contrast to another state (e.g. unconsciousness, inebriatedness, etc.), as a set of positive traits (e.g....Q: may I ask what your definition of consciousness is? For example, do you define it in contrast to another state (e.g. unconsciousness, inebriatedness, etc.), as a set of positive traits (e.g. responsiveness to external stimuli, complexity of behaviour, recognition of self in a mirror, etc.), your internal experiences (e.g. a personal narration of events, the sensation of existence, etc.), ...?
If you've already explained yourself elsewhere I could poke through your comment history, but I always feel like a voyeur by doing so without permission 😅
-
Comment on Why normal people aren’t using AI agents in ~tech
kacey (edited )Link ParentAah, fair. I know a couple people who did that sort of thing. I think it was a lot more common earlier on, then they all moved out to sell other peoples' 3D models on Etsy instead. Not really my...It seemed like a little side project of the owner and it was kind of expensive for what it was.
Aah, fair. I know a couple people who did that sort of thing. I think it was a lot more common earlier on, then they all moved out to sell other peoples' 3D models on Etsy instead. Not really my cup of tea ...
[design issues]
Fair enough as well! I'd note that, depending on the geometry, affixing 3d printed parts onto e.g. cheap, small diameter, commodity threaded rod (or even something like coat hanger wire) could work well. And that -- were you willing to have it printed anyhow -- a lot of the engineering filaments (e.g. carbon fibre-reinforced polycarbonate) should be able to take basically anything you can throw at them.
Just food for thought; I expect you already had this discussion, and skipped it in your comment for brevity 😅 hope you find a solution that works for you, though.
-
Comment on Why normal people aren’t using AI agents in ~tech
kacey (edited )Link ParentAfaik, depending on the shop, yep. Machinists machine to a spec that an engineer engineers for them, and presumably that goes for 3d printing shops as well. Their expertise is in maintaining and...But don’t fucking ask me to familiarize myself with CAD like, is the only work you expected to do owning the machine?
Afaik, depending on the shop, yep. Machinists machine to a spec that an engineer engineers for them, and presumably that goes for 3d printing shops as well. Their expertise is in maintaining and operating a print farm.
Btw I've been screwing around in CAD for a few months at this point, and I can try to crank something out if you're OK to share that info? (and it isn't too complex) No guarantees that it's correct, however, ofc.
-
Comment on Any significant changes to Tildes are extremely unlikely in ~tildes.official
kacey Link Parentfyi that you can counter "noise" labels by upvoting, IIRC at a ratio of 4:1. So, upvoted.fyi that you can counter "noise" labels by upvoting, IIRC at a ratio of 4:1. So, upvoted.
-
Comment on Is it time to include pronouns? in ~tildes
kacey Link ParentHah, yeah, it looks like it was introduced back in March 2019, so you missed it by a couple months!Hah, yeah, it looks like it was introduced back in March 2019, so you missed it by a couple months!
-
Comment on D6 TTRPG suggestions in ~games.tabletop
kacey Link ParentIn case it helps, the GM I swap back and forth with has done some fun one shots with it, too, by using bang (wildcard) skills and a few pregen characters! That gets people moving really quickly,...In case it helps, the GM I swap back and forth with has done some fun one shots with it, too, by using bang (wildcard) skills and a few pregen characters! That gets people moving really quickly, if you want to slip a game in. Your character can just be:
- one positive trait, and a few quirks (there're some lists in the books for inspiration and approximate point scores). Roll on a 9 or less or else the quirks affect your RP,
- one bang skill, which is something like Doctor! or Politician!, which you justify to the DM as to how it applies in that case, and they apply modifiers and let you roll. E.g. you could roll Doctor! to deal with an unruly bar-goer by justifying that you've deescalated patients before, or Politician! to try to fast talk someone at the door,
- your base stat line.
Then you can use the defaulting rules down from your bang skill or the appropriate attribute to cover for everything else, and you can pretty much get rolling in a few minutes of prep time (mostly spent between players discussing how their characters know each other and etc.). It's been good fun whenever we've done it!
-
Comment on Is it time to include pronouns? in ~tildes
kacey LinkI think people tend to post them in their bios if they have a preference? So it might be nice to have that as a hover text. But if they don't list anything, presumably they don't mind being...I think people tend to post them in their bios if they have a preference? So it might be nice to have that as a hover text. But if they don't list anything, presumably they don't mind being potentially misgendered.
IME I just check their bio for a preferred pronoun, and use they/them or @'ing otherwise.
-
Comment on (book impressions) Mudgirls Manifesto: Handbuilt Homes, Hand Crafted Lives in ~design
kacey Link(excerpt from the book's intro, and a brief summary from a local paper) This was an interesting, if short, read! Briefly: the book covers some experiences from a women's collective that builds cob...(excerpt from the book's intro, and a brief summary from a local paper)
This was an interesting, if short, read! Briefly: the book covers some experiences from a women's collective that builds cob structures (among several other things) together off in the backwoods of British Columbia. They pack up their stuff and their children, then go camp out at the job site as a work party to make the change they want to see in the world.
My impression is that it's intentionally radical and not necessarily one for one replicable, however, a lot of what they do/did is:
- child care is provided for all participants, and costed in their proposals,
- compensation is based around whatever is sustainable, not maximizing profit,
- decisions are made as a group, not via a strict hierarchy,
- no dudes allowed on the jobsite
... that last one requires a bit of context. They note that, in several anecdotes, men and women alike will accidentally start behaving per their rigid social roles in mixed company, to their own detriment (and the stated goal of the collective, which includes empowering women).
One example given was that a husband who dropped off his wife and children felt the need to direct the jobsite, which resulted in a bunch of stress on his part: they were used to working without supervision, which seemed like chaos, but ultimately eventually worked. When informed that everything is A OK and going to plan, you can sit down because we don't need help, that was an immense weight off of his shoulders. The moral of the story being that socially burdening men with being leaders blinds us to the possibility of allowing others -- or groups of people -- to share the responsibility.
They also dive into a bunch of anti-capitalist messaging, which I won't go into since it's been beaten to death in other topics, and I'm not certain if it's the core message they're getting across 😅 broadly, I think the authors' are trying to empower people to think of and create alternatives to the systems which constrain their options today, which necessarily means for 99% of us that they're critiquing capitalism.
They also delve into some general discontent around the notions of building codes/engineering, life safety, and property ownership, which gave me pause. I don't recommend buying the book for effectively that reason alone: although they're doing some really cool stuff, replicating it at scale would statistically put people in harms way (and imo would also environmentally devastate the Earth's ecosystems). But the core ideas are still neat!
Overall I liked it, and would recommend borrowing a copy at the library for an afternoon read if the topic of literally building a brighter future appeals to you. It's a pretty easy read, but is imo kinda repetitive (apparently each section was written by different authors, which shows). Maybe skip the last section on construction techniques, and go do some research on structural engineering/building science, though :3
-
(book impressions) Mudgirls Manifesto: Handbuilt Homes, Hand Crafted Lives
11 votes -
Comment on D6 TTRPG suggestions in ~games.tabletop
kacey LinkOh! GURPS! Please play GURPS, there are dozens of us XD The base set is pretty large, but if you're just fooling around, the GURPS lite rules are 32 pages long and are compatible with the rest of...Oh! GURPS! Please play GURPS, there are dozens of us XD
The base set is pretty large, but if you're just fooling around, the GURPS lite rules are 32 pages long and are compatible with the rest of the system. Mechanically, it's 3d6 roll under: i.e. if your skill in
Climbingis 11, then you need to roll three dice that add up to less than or equal to that. One potential downside is that it's a little harder to guess the odds of hitting a specific number, but having a printout solves that nicely imo.To pitch it a little more: GURPS is a system that you, as the GM, need to curate for your players. There are books covering everything from mechs to mages, and tommy guns to tomahawks. If you're into D&D, the Dungeon Fantasy books are decent, but as with everything else, you need to pick and choose what you want to enable. Generally, I'd suggest starting off with GURPS Lite, then pull in anything you feel is missing (e.g. equipment) or else homebrew it.
Combat can be anything from extremely crunchy (hit locations, crippling, long term damage, fatigue damage, and even sub-fatigue damage in order to make it even more granular) to extremely un-crunchy (I personally tend to run it this way; just make the players roll for a combat skill and determine outcomes based on degree of success).
My group's played a bunch of stuff over the years, but we keep coming back to GURPS! Especially if you want a system that uses a few D6's, it's a good one.
Mmhm, I think you hit the nail on the head! This kinda feels like a green vs. grey urbanism thing, where this group leans heavily into the green/"return to nature" side of the debate.
I think I broadly agree with the notion that living efficiently is the most effective way to mitigate the impact of human habitation, but I think I differ a bit in the direct implications? As in, the specifics of how cities are designed in order to create those efficiencies, and their necessary impact on the local ecology.
IMO: the built environment is still the environment, and people are still animals that're living in it. I genuinely do not believe that the urban ecosystem need consist exclusively of rats, pigeons, and whatever raccoons can fit in the bushes, and that we can design cities that support biodiversity and the local ecology. Practically, we're seeing bits and pieces of that show up since fighting nature constantly has an engineering cost too -- e.g. in how we're implementing distributed stormwater diversion to avoid massive runoff costs, or how green spaces are used to provide shade to reduce the urban heat island effect. But I think that further, dramatic improvements are possible, especially if we can find viable alternatives to paving over a quarter+ of the area for car traffic.
But yeah, having everyone retreat into the hinterlands to grow potatoes on their acreage would end in disaster; agreed.