“90% accurate” is a non-statement. It’s like you haven’t even watched the video you respond to. Also, where the hell did you pull that number from?

How specific is it and how sensitive is it is what matters. And if Mirai in https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scitranslmed.aba4373 is the same model that the tweet mentions, then neither its specificity nor sensitivity reach 90%. And considering that the image in the tweet is trackable to a publication in the same year (https://news.mit.edu/2021/robust-artificial-intelligence-tools-predict-future-cancer-0128), I’m fairly sure that it’s the same Mirai.

https://youtube.com/shorts/xIMlJUwB1m8?si=zH6eF5xZ5Xoz_zsz

Detecting is not enough to be useful.

I'm not sure if you're calling Putin a stupid man that is easily manipulated or incompetent.

They are parroting Russian propaganda. The one where “the west” is stipid, cunning, strong, and rotting all at the same time.

So many castles lost to recent history…

Finns would find this particularly ironic.

Sourcehut

Publication Date: January 8, 1983

It’s not about morality, it’s about having a damn clue. Shared traumas matter.

Not that it’s untranslatable, but I enjoy it quite a lot.

Поцілуй бузька в калатало - go kiss a stork on the knocker.

If you ever heard storks, you’ll recognize the dismissiveness of this statement.

The idea of centrally planned economy ignores the lessons of the past. Bronze Age empires and recent examples all display universal inability to adjust to changes.

It’s the same magical thinking as the blind belief in market forces exhibits.
Priests of “invisible hand of market” ignore information exchange speed limits and market inertia, believing that markets will just magically fix everything in time for it to matter.
Preachers of central planning ignore information exchange speed limits and market inertia (and yes, there is a market, as long as there is goods and services exchange, however indirect) by believing they will have all the relevant information and the capacity to process it in time for it to matter.

Neither is true. Neither school of thought even attempted to show itself to be true.

NoYeah no. Get out of US bubble.

Private and public are both viable models of operations with some applicability overlap. Private doesn’t necessarily pursue profit first, despite US literally enforcing it.

Basic needs that are either unchanging or change very slowly are the purview of public policy. Healthcare, infrastructure, etc. Privatize it and you’ll have a catastrophe.

Basic needs that benefit from variation and supply elasticity with a necessary baseline is where hybrid model works well. Public entrepreneurship provides variation, regulations or public enterprises cover baseline. Agriculture is a great example of such overlap. Private-only agriculture leads to profiteering on basic human need. Public-only agriculture leads to famines due to incompetence, malice, or lack of elasticity.

Desires that people can live without and can change on a whim is where private innovation thrives. Be it a product to sell or a charity project to pursue. Some of the results of said innovation can and will become matters of public interest. Forbid private enterprise here, and you’ll end up in a bleak reality of North Korea.

We literally had a case of “public everything” half a century ago and it didn’t fucking work. It needed serfdom and insane amounts of natural resources to prop itself up. It also left a mafia-led capitalism in its wake.

We also have a live case of blind trust in markets, as if information was immediately available everywhere. It leads to a very similar looking outcome.

Solving the Hard Problem of Consciousness with React Hooks

🤷‍♂️