Live data from Hacker News

Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

johnsalvatier.org

301–304 of 304 posts

Re: Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

#301
post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate on “leveraging syntax”? Like commenting on the structure of their argument?

I think the author is talking about making bad-faith but very defensible interpretations. You can accomplish that by purposely taking hyperbole too literally, or by intentionally overlooking that a statement was meant as a metaphor. (Just a couple of examples.) Very often, English-language experts can appear to defeat subject-matter experts in debates. When this happens it's usually because of footwork on the "langua…

Thank you. That makes a lot of sense.

Re: Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

#302
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Should likely read the comments by the author about just what is and what isn't made up.

Who has that kind of attention to detail? :)

To be fair, it's not trivial to access. These comments only made it into later printings.

Re: Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

#303
post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perception of reality is not the same for everybody, but there is a single objective reality that we all perceive in our imperfect ways.

That is just speculation. Maybe the only things that exist are subjective perceptions and they don't all overlap. Then the objective reality only exists from god's viewpoint, so if there's no god...

If there is no objective reality, then what is the explanation for the overlap of our subjective experiences? By the way, you do bring up a good reason for the existence of God as the only one who knows all of reality. However, God does not know reality by perception. Rather, God is the source of reality, so he knows it because it begins in his mind.

Re: Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)

#304
post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was my impression that he intentionally cultivates those aspects of his public persona. That is, if I can't deal with those particular points of personal obnoxiousness, I probably also won't hang credulously on his every word. In that case why would he want to interact with me at all? He's not the only person to employ this strategy. Personally I'm more willing to endure the idiosyncrasies of e.g. RMS.

Didn't he promise some AI stuff and never delivered?

You might try looking here: https://intelligence.org/all-publications/
Post reply on HN