Yes, lucky.

I have a few questions, feel free to answer any.

• Is your end-goal AGI?

• Are you working on the alignment problem?

• Opinions on transformers and LLMs?

• What are your predictions for the field in the next year, next 5 years, and next 10 years?

Maybe a very rough prototype after NeuraLink manages to do I/O. But the actual FDVR will happen post-singularity.

No, it's cool, but in line with what I expected.

> minus the quirky personality, that bot's pretty dry

You can probably instruct it to have a more fun personality. Actually I'd be really interested in seeing if it can be funny.

The biggest reason is ignorance. People are scared of nuclear, wrongly so.

Which game?

> to be sure that only the receiver is hit by the beam and no one and never will be able to 'hack' the system to use it as a weapon.

You don't. Nothing is "hack proof". If it can be controlled from the ground, it can be hacked. Even if it can't be controlled, someone might find a way.

You don't need to recycle silicon, that's cheap and abundant enough. The rare earth metals, yes.

Anyway, hopefully this isn't a technology for commercial/consumer use, but for very specific cases, where you actually need the electronics to degrade after some time.

I don't want my electrical components to be biodegradable, but saying something isn't good just because it hasn't worked in the past is just stupid.

Yes, I didn't feel like reading it.

> cult like obsession with accepting death or old age for some people

https://hpluspedia.org/wiki/Deathism

It's basically a way to cope.

Agreed. However that happens (cables, nanobots, implants, or something else), we will probably need a bi-directional (providing both input and output read/write) BCI to get full immersion VR.

Headsets, gloves, and other wearable things will never achieve that fully (unless they themselves become effectively BCIs).

So, instead of drilling the skull, gouge out the eyes?

No way to tell. Maybe to them it's equivalent of us of expanding a 2d jpg picture by 1x1px every minute, for a day. For us it might seem like a lot, because it's all there is, but for them it might be trivial, with the end result being a 1440x1440px picture.

> assuming thermodynamics is a thing outside our universe

Yes, assuming that, which might, or might not be correct.

Everything that there is, regardless of its size, is by definition "the entire universe".

Whether it's bigger or smaller than the "base"/"parent" universe, doesn't really matter.

You might think that it needs to be smaller, because a bigger universe might take more energy to compute, for the parent universe. But that's not necessarily the case, it might be that the parent universe is a lot more complex than ours, and simulating ours for them is trivial, or that their laws of physics are different from ours.

> The solution to it is to just have hardware that does the calculation multiple times to ensure a bit didn't get switched, the result that comes up most often is assumed to be the correct one.

So we have to do the same calculation multiple times, effectively negating any gains coming from smaller transistors? Or even counting the additional calculations, it's still worth it? I assume the latter, since we're still doing it.

> We can clearly see this as a CPU from 2008 (I7 920) and a CPU from 2022 (I7 13900k) have almost 100x difference in amount of transistors, yet the 13900k is "only" 5-10x faster.

Ah, there's the answer. Thanks.

Yeah, but what about quantum tunneling?

Almost, but the "i" in this case is read as you would read "e".

> There were about 117 billion humans in total. So it makes 8/117 = ~6.83%

But that only counts past humans. Of course, we can't know how many humans there will be in the future (if any), but that number is probably higher.

> Has Google already done it?

Probably.

Didn't even see that. No, I use extensions on both Chrome and Firefox. I just thought it was native, I wasn't shitting on extensions.

Ah it's an extension, I thought it was a native feature.

Good to know, thanks.

I'm guessing that people that complain about this don't understand or even read those warnings.