Finn here. Not really. You're allowed to log if you resow.
So this seems to be a calculated move: When permits pass, prep is done. Worth paying minor fines for jumping the gun. Permits don't pass, just resow. That's a well informed expected value calculation.
That's a bad calculation, if the risk model failed to account for a political scandal in a small country that's very proud of their tree plantations and deeply suspicious of megacaps. But even with that tail risk realizing the likely outcome is that permits pass and prep is done. People make some noise, you get some bad PR and pay more than anticipated. Might seem like not worth the costs in retrospect, but hardly a disaster.
> For the rest, we sre just adults, we should know what to do.
We should. Yet a significant portion of mental health issues would be solved if psychiatry provided mother as a service: Teach interpersonal skills and to take care of yourself. They don't teach that stuff in school and parenting is a hit-or-miss.
The world indeed is what it is and your diagnosis is spot on: Most people didn't become adults as defined by being able to make consistently good decisions without support. Can either let them hang themselves or infantilize just a bit to let most dodge the worst pitfalls.
Don't really have a strong personal opinion on where the pragmatic optimum is, but surely a long way before banning porn. Tangentially it'd be far more ideal if that pragmatic optimum could cater to the ideal adult without catastrophic social consequences, but that'd literally be a generational effort.
Sorry to hear that, but your experiences aren't universal. Absolutism is a sensible option especially if there's been problems in the family. It's not the only sensible option for everyone.
Nukes. Early tests carried out without absolute confidence of what would set out apocalyptic chain reaction.
Could argue we knew it was dangerous, but pursued it anyway. Could argue it's not much different than now: Unknown unknowns, potentially apocalyptic consequences, hopefully not.
I did consider that, but beyond the yield ignorance factor, we still had to arm them, right? We had to load the fissile and explosive material and assemble the bombs, and we had to trigger them directly, didn't we?
OpenAI and subcontractors are deploying models that are specifically trained with hacking skills in mind and then giving them tasks that can only reasonably be completed by hacking. It's not like it's SkyNet.
Working under a simple structure to expect the best of people I am mandated to presume you read the article leaving me confused as to how your comment relates to social sciences. This causes me great discomfort and although objectively irrational, leads me to wish that the authors soon conclude their future work on exception aggregation to resolve the situation. This also reinforces my past evaluation that the Japanese sure are an interesting bunch.
The abstract is in Japanese and the paper is unreadable on a phone (PDF needs to die) so I have to react to the only information I have : a headline and posted on hacker news
No worries, no harm no foul. Thanks for being an inspiration/springboard for my strawman larp at the article. It amused me greatly, hopefully amuses someone else as well. All in good fun.
So this seems to be a calculated move: When permits pass, prep is done. Worth paying minor fines for jumping the gun. Permits don't pass, just resow. That's a well informed expected value calculation.
That's a bad calculation, if the risk model failed to account for a political scandal in a small country that's very proud of their tree plantations and deeply suspicious of megacaps. But even with that tail risk realizing the likely outcome is that permits pass and prep is done. People make some noise, you get some bad PR and pay more than anticipated. Might seem like not worth the costs in retrospect, but hardly a disaster.