/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12311639
>I had to specifically change my PRs to use terms like include & omit to avoid white-list and black-list.

>>11881843
ill bite
>Why do brainlets always make infantile complaint threads
>their nonsense gets scientifically disproved
>you fail to understand logic and facts
good, prove me wrong then
waiting for the evidence that this board is actually filled with smart people rather than absolute retards as every single "you should be able to solve this"-thread shows

>>11866062
>japs dont record rape and molestation like western countries
source that proves a significance in perceived different recording practises of violent sexual crimes in japan vs the western world ?

>>11767530
I am sceptical of this for obvious reasons (they can induce psychosis for one). Show me your studies.

>>11493618

>>11413709
>We have a very high general intelligence that is actually quite close to the upper limit of maximum general intelligence for the universe.

>>11371668
correlation != causation
what kind of an absolute schizo would make the assumption that some anon would make the effort of using a vpn just to reply to himself and then beeing able to immediatley post a screenshot when accused of samefagging ?
hmmm ? makes very little sense
>doesnt even use green arrows, - instead
maybe you dont belong here and thats why you have no clue how this website works

lets go through your "evidence" anyways
>Time
why wait for 4 minutes when the delay between posts for each ip is 60 sec
going by your logic of me allegedly using a vpn i would have been able to "reply to myself"
why wait for 4 minutes ?
no evidence
>Lower case typing
convenient, only autists would invest the effort using upper cases
the great majority of posts are written in lower case, this is no evidence
>No full stops
the post replying to me has only one word (same applies to the point before)
no evidence
>Both use images
this is an image board, adding an image to your post is common
no evidence
>Both images are jpgs
yes ? both are from the same image format which is likely the most popular image format to exist
no evidence
>Both use contextless anti-Jewish images
wrong the poster replying to me has an image that is related to climate
my image is not related to climate but to the adl
>hurr its anti jewish
whatever lol
>Filenames of images are lowercase words separated by underscores
yes, this is a common way to format file names (broad description of its content separated with underscores for readability) using uppercase letters in filenames is uncommon and some systems dont separeate between upper and lowercase filenames
try saving a file as "File" in a folder where a "file" file already exists, wont work (depending on your os ofc)
>Not particularly smooth
you are still wrong and you are unwilling to accept it
furthermore you are not accustomed to this site
>>11371670
the page shows posts / files / ips / page
you have no conclusive evidence and are wrong

>>11186038
>Traditional computation involves instruction flow graphs and logical circuits, but biological computation can change the instruction flow dynamically, on the fly.
>Traditional computation can't do that. It has a stack and a heap which can't be randomly unloaded without huge computational costs.
Sounds like bullshit. Where's the proof? Gonna need to see proof you can't do this with the same universal computation paradigm that can do everything and proof that injecting biology into it would help solve this nonexistent problem.

>>10967733
None of that is relevant to the claim about human brains not being computable.
There is NO legitimate evidence the human brain is something beyond a Turing machine or that it requires some nonsense quantum magic to reproduce it. The Penrose Orch-Or theory is bullshit.

>>10849752
>self driving Tesla, fails ALL THE TIME when it comes to distinguish between stationary and moving cars
Define "ALL THE TIME."
How many times out of 100 is it failing to distinguish between stationary and moving cars and what is your source?
Also what about Waymo? Not sure why you'd be so convinced Tesla's efforts were way ahead of theirs. Google's not exactly a small time player, and they're already on record as saying they can perform the driving task. Their issue isn't whether it can drive or not, it's whether they can navigate the legal issues for beginning to offer a service based on the working technology.

>>10799736
Can I get a formal proof of why we should assume what biological organisms do isn't also composed of some analogous equivalent to "pattern matching and decision trees?"
I wonder how much of this complaint is legitimate and how much is just people overrating what people do. I know for example biological brains don't literally use gradient descent like an artificial neural network, but they do still operate in terms of *optimized* behaviors. The biological behavior of walking is 100% without a doubt optimized. So it only matters so much to say "it isn't gradient descent." It's using something equivalent given that you end up at the exact same destination when you're using different equally valid methods for finding the optimal solution.

>>10792001
>you can even starve yourself to death while still being technically obese.
Gonna need some proof on that. Obese people have been documented living without food for absurdly long amounts of time. NASA even put serious research into using obese people for the specific reason that they'd be able to last many months without food in a torpor during very long distance spaceflights.
Snopes confirmed at least one obese man lasted over a year without eating food. He was fine afterwards too.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/survive-without-eating-382-days/

>>10773229
>But you can't simulate an infinite amount of time.
Is there a formal proof of this idea? Also:
>it still makes sense to collect every resource in the universe, extinguish all stars and use the resources as efficiently as possible.
That's not infinite either, so I don't see why you're invoking infinity as a requirement for compressed simulation time in the first place.

>>10734544
>There are many solved problems that have more configurations than chess.

>>10733540
>hence the IQ race analogy, you will find a lot of studies showing there's no correlation even though it's true.
Do you have a specific study that actually claims there isn't ANY difference in IQ?

>>10717009
>It's not a choice. You don't get to make it.
OK, it's not a choice. Here's the new question:
What specific law is there which says we "MUST" assume this?:
>>10716955
>Computability bears the burden of constructive proof, so absent a TOE, we MUST assume that it is incomputable when forced to make an assumption.
Need specific law here.

>>8375086
>Trap porn is literally one of, if not the most popular porn out there for straight men.
I think not.