stray

Powders can be good, but they can also be garbage. It depends on the brand. But with whole foods like legumes or animal meats, you can be sure you're getting quality protein.

I'm not sure how humans go about creating ideas, and therefore cannot be sure that the resulting ideas aren't a combination of learned things. There have been people in history who did things like guess that everything is made up of tiny particles long before we could ever test the idea, but probably they got the idea from observing various forms of matter, right? Like seeing how rocks can crumble into sand and grain can be ground to flour. I don't think they would have been able to come up with the idea in a vacuum. I think anything we're capable of creating must be based on things which we've already learned about, but I don't know that I can prove that.

I agree that humans are just flesh computers, but I don't know whether we can say LLMs have overcome human creativity because I think the definition is open to interpretation.

Is the intentionality capable only with metacognition a requirement for something to be art? If no, then we and AI and spiders making webs are all doing the same "creativity" regardless of our abilities to consider ourselves and our actions.

If yes, then is the AI (or the spider) capable of metacognition? I know of no means to answer that except that ChatGPT can be observed engaging in what appears to be metacognition. And that leaves me with the additional question: What is the difference between pretending to think something and actually thinking it?

In terms of specifically "overcoming" creativity, I don't think that kind of value judgement has any real meaning. How do you determine whether artist A or B is more creative? Is it more errors in reproduction leading to more original compositions?

How often do Tigers even run into another tiger?

All the time. While tigers lead solitary lifestyles, they're not devoid of socialization. Territories overlap and lead to peaceful interactions and conflicts over borders. Sometimes they even cooperate in hunting or live together, though that's less frequent. The nature of their interactions is mostly dictated by sexual relations and the ratio of tigers to prey.

This is not meant to contribute to the tiger vs lion issue.

I also think it's interesting to note that while the mane serves a practical purpose, it's also wildly oversized as a result of sexual selection.

The documentary style quickly takes a back seat, but the interviews are always there and heavily used. Try Modern Family first and see of the Office doesn't hit better once you're used to the interviews there. They're brief fourth-wall breaks and not diagetic.

e: I would say if you're not having an absolute blast by the Dundees episode (I think that S2E1?), don't waste any more of your time.

I didn't get that far into the show because I was bored and lost in the space battles. Action scenes are always shakey cameras and me being confused about who's on what ship. I was extremely interested in the human dramas, politics, and especially the mystery of the fungal thing. The acting and dialects were really cool though, and I'd probably miss out on those unless the author does a good job writing them. Does it seem like I'd prefer reading it instead? I kind of feel like I just talked myself into trying the show again. :s

Back in my day sugar was only C and H.

This reminds me of the ASMR video I watched where this person removed my cranial nerves for cleaning and I was so immersed that I was kind of weirded out and upset by their sudden theft.

Has is occurred to you that the reason no one is arguing that Biden and Harris aren't pieces of shit is because they are actually pieces of shit, and no one in this reply chain said otherwise? That's why "no one said that" was so funny to me.

Ok, but no one here said that.

They literally did though, in those exact words.

Everything about biology is a random effect. Even a mutation that's selected for wasn't planned; it just happened by chance. Like if you're an aquatic species maybe you'll end up being a strong swimmer over generations, but the water doesn't pressure you towards that on its own. You have to coincidentally develop flukes that make you a stronger swimmer before those traits can be selected for.

Sometimes traits that get passed down aren't beneficial at all because they don't make an impact on reproduction. Think of an animal that comes in many colors like a house cat or certain fish species. In such cases it's clear that the color of the animal doesn't have any bearing on its ability to reproduce, so a variety of colors are passed down for no particular reason.

I would love to learn why this isn't completely stupid, if anyone has a way of explaining. We'd be down entire genres of games if developers didn't copy each other's homework.