FlowVoid

joined 2 years ago
[–] FlowVoid@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I think it's pretty simple.

  • Wagner and the Russian Army are competing for increasingly limited supplies in Ukraine.

  • This led Prigozhin to complain publicly about the Russian Ministry of Defense.

  • In response, Putin was planning to subordinate Wagner to the Russian Army.

Subordination would limit Prigozhin's power and also reduce or eliminate his personal source of income. Which basically forced the events playing out today.

[–] FlowVoid@kbin.social 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Whatever that rule is, I bet the mods at /r/interestingasfuck are ready to enforce it.

[–] FlowVoid@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

If you are a simulation, then your choice doesn't matter. You will never get any real benefit from the boxes. It's like saying, "there is also a finite possibility that the machine is lying and all the boxes are empty". In which case, the choice is again irrelevant.

Situations in which your choice doesn't matter are not worth considering. Only the remaining possibility, that you are not a simulation and the machine is not lying, is worth considering.

[–] FlowVoid@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

But if it's true that the machine can perfectly predict what you will choose, then by definition your choice will be the same its prediction. In which case, you should choose one box.

[–] FlowVoid@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Regardless of whether the machine is right, if you don't believe it can perfectly predict what you'll do then taking both boxes is always better than just one.

[–] FlowVoid@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (2 children)

If you want to command something in the water, you run a wire from that something to a receiver in the cabin.

[–] FlowVoid@kbin.social 3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

It's much easier if you reframe the problem:

Someone says they've built a machine that can perfectly predict what you will do. Do you believe them?

If so, take one box.
If not, take both boxes.

[–] FlowVoid@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

It was a private message. It's not going to be actionable as defamation.

[–] FlowVoid@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago

That's equivalent to one metric bag.

[–] FlowVoid@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This is a good article on whether non-EU websites have to obey the GDPR. It boils down to two criteria:

If your business is offering goods or services, irrespective of whether a payment of the data subject is required, to such data subjects in the EU

or

If your business monitors the behavior of EU citizens and their behavior takes place within the union.

The latter includes use of advertising cookies, location tracking, etc.

If neither of those apply, you can probably ignore the GDPR.

[–] FlowVoid@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

They don't survey 10000 people in one town. They try to get a randomly chosen sample of 10000 people, or even 1000 people, across the entire United States.

If the entire United States is 50% men and 50% women, then a randomly chosen sample of 10000 will likely contain no more than 5100 men and no more than 5100 women. A sample of 1000 will likely contain no more than 530 men and no more than 530 women.

Now replace "men" and "women" with "Democrat" and "Republican", or any other demographic. That's how you end up with a group of people that reasonably represents the entire United States.

view more: ‹ prev next ›