Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amazon Takes Fresh Stab at $16B Housekeeping Industry

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 85 posts

Re: Amazon Takes Fresh Stab at $16B Housekeeping Industry

#71

Post by jaibot »

neogodless wrote: post #62
jaibot wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_(web_browser)

Is this a trivial change in user behavior from using Chrome? (My assumption is that, at the very least, I'll need to switch from using my password manager extension to using a separate app, and having to copy/paste. I'll also probably have to export/import bookmarks. I also use Chrome profiles heavily. Are all of these things trivial to migrate?)

Brave has built-in support for multiple third-party password managers.

Chrome profiles - I dunno.

Re: Amazon Takes Fresh Stab at $16B Housekeeping Industry

#72

Post by kakarot »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #64
kakarot wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quantum mechanics has no bearing on the macro scale that classical physics inhabit in our current models. We currently have not synthesized the two models into a singular theory. Classical physics is deterministic. I thought this was common knowledge...

The whole point of quantum mechanics is that classical physics doesn't fully describe the world. Obviously phenomena that require quantum mechanics to describe them are rarely observable at the macro level, but it's clearly not the case that they are never observable because otherwise we wouldn't have been able to make the observations that led to the idea of quantum mechanics. It seems readily apparent that the futu…

The whole point of quantum mechanics is that classical physics doesn't fully describe the world.

Quantum mechanics doesn't have a point, it's a theory based on observation of quantum phenomena. It is currently irreconcilable with classical physics, which we still use to model the universe on useful scales.

Quantum mechanics therefore are irrelevant here. The current standard model, which is the best we've got right now, is deterministic on classical scales.

Which brings me back to my original comment:

Unless our current understanding of physics is completely wrong

It's at least a little wrong, but to say that our theory of classical physics isn't deterministic is just wrong. Until we have a better theory, that's just what we have to go with.

Re: Amazon Takes Fresh Stab at $16B Housekeeping Industry

#73

Post by TheCoelacanth »

kakarot wrote: post #72
TheCoelacanth wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of quantum mechanics is that classical physics doesn't fully describe the world. Obviously phenomena that require quantum mechanics to describe them are rarely observable at the macro level, but it's clearly not the case that they are never observable because otherwise we wouldn't have been able to make the observations that led to the idea of quantum mechanics. It seems readily apparent that the futu…

The whole point of quantum mechanics is that classical physics doesn't fully describe the world. Quantum mechanics doesn't have a point , it's a theory based on observation of quantum phenomena. It is currently irreconcilable with classical physics, which we still use to model the universe on useful scales. Quantum mechanics therefore are irrelevant here. The current standard model, which is the best we've got right…

I'm not saying that classical physics isn't deterministic. I'm saying that classical physics is provably not a fully accurate model even at macro scales. For most problems at the macro scale, our best model is deterministic, but it is also easy to construct scenarios where macro scale events are not deterministic unless quantum phenomena are also deterministic, so clearly our best model is one that acknowledges that macro scale events might not be fully deterministic.

Re: Amazon Takes Fresh Stab at $16B Housekeeping Industry

#74

Post by kakarot »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #73
kakarot wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of quantum mechanics is that classical physics doesn't fully describe the world. Quantum mechanics doesn't have a point , it's a theory based on observation of quantum phenomena. It is currently irreconcilable with classical physics, which we still use to model the universe on useful scales. Quantum mechanics therefore are irrelevant here. The current standard model, which is the best we've got right…

I'm not saying that classical physics isn't deterministic. I'm saying that classical physics is provably not a fully accurate model even at macro scales. For most problems at the macro scale, our best model is deterministic, but it is also easy to construct scenarios where macro scale events are not deterministic unless quantum phenomena are also deterministic, so clearly our best model is one that acknowledges that…

Show me such a case in the macro scale where the arrow of time reverses or disappears, instead of just postulating.

Re: Amazon Takes Fresh Stab at $16B Housekeeping Industry

#75

Post by TheCoelacanth »

kakarot wrote: post #74
TheCoelacanth wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying that classical physics isn't deterministic. I'm saying that classical physics is provably not a fully accurate model even at macro scales. For most problems at the macro scale, our best model is deterministic, but it is also easy to construct scenarios where macro scale events are not deterministic unless quantum phenomena are also deterministic, so clearly our best model is one that acknowledges that…

Show me such a case in the macro scale where the arrow of time reverses or disappears, instead of just postulating.

I don't understand what you are asking. Clearly quantum phenomena are observable at the macro scale. Every quantum mechanics experiment is an example of this, e.g. the double slit experiment.

Re: Amazon Takes Fresh Stab at $16B Housekeeping Industry

#76

Post by kakarot »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #75
kakarot wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Show me such a case in the macro scale where the arrow of time reverses or disappears, instead of just postulating.

I don't understand what you are asking. Clearly quantum phenomena are observable at the macro scale. Every quantum mechanics experiment is an example of this, e.g. the double slit experiment.

How is the double slit experiment an example of non-determinism?

Re: Amazon Takes Fresh Stab at $16B Housekeeping Industry

#77

Post by TheCoelacanth »

kakarot wrote: post #76
TheCoelacanth wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what you are asking. Clearly quantum phenomena are observable at the macro scale. Every quantum mechanics experiment is an example of this, e.g. the double slit experiment.

How is the double slit experiment an example of non-determinism?

Let's say that I set up the double slit and then decide that I will make a macro level decision based on the observation of which slit a particle passes through. The observation of which slit the particle passes through is non-deterministic according to most interpretations of quantum mechanics, so my macro-level actions are now also non-deterministic.

Alternatively, take the example of Clinton Davisson and Lester Germer in 1923 and then attempt to predict what papers they will publish in the future using classical physics. Clearly it can't be done because it is dependent on quantum effects.

Re: Amazon Takes Fresh Stab at $16B Housekeeping Industry

#78

Post by kakarot »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #77
kakarot wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is the double slit experiment an example of non-determinism?

Let's say that I set up the double slit and then decide that I will make a macro level decision based on the observation of which slit a particle passes through. The observation of which slit the particle passes through is non-deterministic according to most interpretations of quantum mechanics, so my macro-level actions are now also non-deterministic. Alternatively, take the example of Clinton Davisson and Lester Ge…

> The observation of which slit the particle passes through is non-deterministic according to most interpretations of quantum mechanics, so my macro-level actions are now also non-deterministic

That's not true. The double slit experiment shows that as the arrow of time moves, wave patterns predictably emerge.

Again, until a better unified theory of everything emerges, we currently have no synthesis between quantum and classical physics and thus measured quantum phenomena are currently irrelevant to physics measured in the classical scale.

> Alternatively, take the example of Clinton Davisson and Lester Germer in 1923 and then attempt to predict what papers they will publish in the future using classical physics

This is simply a matter of not having enough information. The amount of information required to "predict the future" in the sense you're talking about is ginormous.

Your concept of determinism is flawed.

Further reading: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/JrhoMTgMrMRJJiS48/decoherenc... https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/eWuuznxeebcjWpdnH/the-so-cal...

Re: Amazon Takes Fresh Stab at $16B Housekeeping Industry

#79

Post by TheCoelacanth »

kakarot wrote: post #78
TheCoelacanth wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's say that I set up the double slit and then decide that I will make a macro level decision based on the observation of which slit a particle passes through. The observation of which slit the particle passes through is non-deterministic according to most interpretations of quantum mechanics, so my macro-level actions are now also non-deterministic. Alternatively, take the example of Clinton Davisson and Lester Ge…

> The observation of which slit the particle passes through is non-deterministic according to most interpretations of quantum mechanics, so my macro-level actions are now also non-deterministic That's not true. The double slit experiment shows that as the arrow of time moves, wave patterns predictably emerge. Again, until a better unified theory of everything emerges, we currently have no synthesis between quantum an…

> Again, until a better unified theory of everything emerges, we currently have no synthesis between quantum and classical physics and thus measured quantum phenomena are currently irrelevant to physics measured in the classical scale.

That means that we don't know how quantum physics and classical physics interact. It doesn't mean that we know they don't interact. Clearly they do in some way or else it would be impossible for us to make the observations that led the development of quantum physics.

> This is simply a matter of not having enough information. The amount of information required to "predict the future" in the sense you're talking about is ginormous.

That information doesn't exist. Clearly it is not possible to predict the existence of quantum mechanics using only classical physics. If it were, quantum mechanics would be part of classical physics. Even knowing the entire state of the entire universe, you could not predict that they would publish a paper about quantum mechanics based solely on classical physics.

Re: Amazon Takes Fresh Stab at $16B Housekeeping Industry

#80

Post by kakarot »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #79
kakarot wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The observation of which slit the particle passes through is non-deterministic according to most interpretations of quantum mechanics, so my macro-level actions are now also non-deterministic That's not true. The double slit experiment shows that as the arrow of time moves, wave patterns predictably emerge. Again, until a better unified theory of everything emerges, we currently have no synthesis between quantum an…

> Again, until a better unified theory of everything emerges, we currently have no synthesis between quantum and classical physics and thus measured quantum phenomena are currently irrelevant to physics measured in the classical scale. That means that we don't know how quantum physics and classical physics interact. It doesn't mean that we know they don't interact. Clearly they do in some way or else it would be impo…

Did you read my links?

I never made a claim that classical physics can predict quantum mechanics. In fact it's the opposite, I said the theories have not been synthesized.

We are no longer arguing about your original claim of non-determinism in the classical scale, and you don't seem to have a comprehensive enough understanding of the concepts involved here and you're not interested in changing your mind, so I'm done arguing about this. I really suggest you read up on decoherence.

Post reply on HN