no dirty emissions

Uhhhh…

EA Journalist Murdering 2027, coming soon!

Edit: for those unaware of how brutal Saudi Arabia is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Jamal_Khashoggi#Assassination

∞

Anthropic said to me

spiritual in its nature

It talked back to me

It looks like you might be experiencing psychosis. The sentences you’ve quoted don’t make sense. That you can’t see this and are quoting them as if they’re meaningful indicates you might have a problem.

What can I do to save him?

Just curious what makes you think there’s something you could do that would save him?

video games … we’ve wasted a lot of time on something that has little to no value

Fun has value. Joy has value. Pleasure has value. Indeed, one could even argue that they’re the only things that do have value.

No, they don’t :-(

Does the Gitlab -> GitHub redirect also long predate the rise in AI scrapers?

Nobody from GNOME has linked the Gitlab -> GitHub redirect to the rise in AI scrapers.

If you haven’t been staying up to date, maybe do that before dismissing explanations?

I surely would were you only to provide references to sources backing up your claims.

I think there’s been a misunderstanding about the issue. They’re rewording other people’s emails and presenting it as their own work. If they just directly quoted the email it wouldn’t be an issue.

You’re not making sense friend.

Firstly, the GNOME Foundation’s financial woes long predate the rise in AI scrapers.

the increase in hosting costs which is hitting everyone for the last few months

I know of no such increase.

it is obviously sensible to assume

I disagree. There’s no need to make assumptions. And even if there were, this does not seem like a sensible assumption to make given that the GNOME Foundation’s financial woes long predate the rise in AI scrapers.

That’s not GNOME-specific. klangcola@reddthat.com is saying GNOME have experienced “massively increased hosting costs” but there’s no mention of increased hosting costs in the article I linked to, massive or otherwise, and as far as I know, nobody has mentioned any increase in the context of GNOME, hence my question.

the massively increased hosting costs.

Eh? What increased hosting costs?

It’s really, really, really bad reportage. 90% of what they post is just rewording emails from mailing lists with nothing added at all. They’re just regurgitating words they don’t understand.

They focus a lot on drama and it’s like a twelve year old decided to write about all the most superficial drama without any technical understanding of what they’re writing about.

Their “benchmarks” have been heavily criticised too and it’s clear they basically have no idea what they’re doing and the numbers aren’t to be trusted.

Their English prose is terrible. “For this …” wut?

All in all, just a sorry excuse for a website. If it were a newspaper, the appropriate term for it would be a “rag”.

The GNOME Foundation has been going downhill for a while, they keep having to cut spending, and cut, and cut. The latest is:

https://www.phoronix.com/news/GNOME-GitHub-GitLab-Redirect

(Forgive the Phoronix link.)

I’d recommend this excellent series if you want a good grounding:

https://www.rigb.org/explore-science/explore/video/arrows-time-back-future-1999

And I also found this video which I haven’t watched but I expect will be good and probably attacks your pondering more directly:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_0o2fJhtSc

Hence, the Orch OR model is not a feasible explanation of the origin of consciousness.

One paper claiming that the Orch OR model is not a feasible explanation of the origin of consciousness does not mean that the Orch OR model is not a feasible explanation of the origin of consciousness.

it seems my memory is better than yours

I’m not sure why you think my memory is in any way relevant.

Published 13 August, 2009

There’s a significant journey from being published in a paper to being taught in classes. I was taught Orch OR somewhere between 2008 and 2010 so there’s no reason to think memory comes into it.

Then you were also taught that there was no way the brain could maintain sustained quantum entanglement

No. I’ve no idea what could have possibly brought you to that conclusion.

Please don’t try to tell me what brought you to that conclusion while multitasking. For that matter, please don’t try to tell me at all.

Which is why I said hypothetically…

I think you may have misused the word “hypothetically” then.

up until a year ago the very idea that quantum entanglement could happen in the brain was treated as a joke for like 30 years

I was taught Orch OR theory at university about 17 years ago.

that’s why the larger theory was instantly dismissed

Instantly dismissed by who? It’s a new theory, there will always be detractors and critics of new theories (see, for example: oxygen theory of combustion). That’s very different from being “instantly dismissed”.