Otto Kretschmer

No, DeepSeek uses regular transformer architecture with a few innovative things, mixture of experts (MoE) and multi head latent attention (MLA) but it's a normal LLM. I mostly use Gemini 2.5 Pro in Google AI Studio and Alibaba's Qwen series. Latest Qwen3 VL is at 2.5 Pro level.

Just... what? And when? I read an article some time ago about a Chinese AI based on spiking neural networks that requires ~90% less computational resources but it's an early stage model and I don't remember where the article was published. I also cannot comment on the merits of spiking neural networks themselves as my knowledge of comp sci is modest in general.

Why should anyone dislike this place enough to pull off a DDoS on it?

I am not a student, university education is long beyond me - I graduated with a master's degree in law in 2019. I used to be a big science fan at age 13-14 but that interest waned in favor of military stuff, history/alt history and geopoltiics/current events in addition to a multitude of other lesser interests.

Have you guys read The God Delusion? From what I've read about that book, it seems to have been written mostly for the Anglosphere - young Earth creationism (or creationism in general) is a big thing in the US but here in Poland as well as in other majority Catholic, mainline Protestant and Eastern Orthodox countries it barely even exists, the official stance of said churches is theistic evolution which isn't at odds with the theory of evolution.

Hi. I read The Selfish Gene in 2014, now I'm planning to re-read it together with The Blind Watchmaker and The Extended Phenotype. What would be the best order to read those two books in and what other books of Richard Dawkins would be a good addition to these three, not counting The God Delusion obviously?

By extraversion I mean the Big Five extraversion which is broader than the popular understanding of the world, since it also includes stuff like assertiveness, activity level and excitement seeking and not just sociability. I mean an actual change in the trait itself and not just behavior. Someone who behaves in a less extroverted way due to having more family- or work-related responsibilities and doesn't have time for socializing but still feels the same urge to be social doesn't count here.

Eh, I've already retracted that downvote. I had overreacted a bit yesterday.

It just occured tro me - should we even debate religious folks? With the exception of stuff like creationism and faith healing, most of human religion is pretty harmless even though it can be bizarre at times.

Care to elaborate? So far - you shall feel the honour of being downvoted.

I do know that faith and reason are technically separate - but since the number of possible religions is infinite and none of them can be proven empirically, why not subscribe to all possible religions at once? Like, just build a shrine with the infinity (♾️) symbol or whatnot and pray to it.

The tv series The Expanse was based on a series of books, it is actually a good hard sci fi.

How would you describe yourselves? I myself have experienced quite a significant poltiical evolution from being a Libertarian at age 18-21, then a Social Democrat and then a non demonational Marxist this year (age 31-31) although I am tolerant of other left wing movements as well as Christian Democrats. Mostly socially progressive as well, ambivalent about gun rights (gun ownership rate is negligible here in Poland and there isn't much debate about it). My political evolution towards the left started with a gradual realization that free market cannot solve everything roughly at age 21.

An Axiomatic Framework for the Domestic Feline SystemLet the universe of discourse be denoted by U. We define a cat, c, as an element of the set C, such that C is a proper subset of the set of Felidae (F), which is in turn a proper subset of Mammalia (M). c ∈ C ⊂ F ⊂ M ⊂ U The entity c is fully described by its state-space, morphology, behavioral functions, and governing quantum-metaphysical principles. 1. Axioms of Morphology and StateAxiom 1.1 (Corporeal Uniqueness): For any c, there exists a unique physical body, B, associated with it. ∀c ∈ C, ∃! B Axiom 1.2 (Standard Configuration): The body B is a topological manifold characterized by the following properties, subject to a standard deviation ε: Limbs (L): The cardinality of the set of locomotive appendages is |L(B)| = 4 ± ε. Caudal Appendage (T): There exists a flexible, uni-dimensional appendage T, such that Length(T) > 0. (Note: A null set, T = ∅, is a permissible, albeit recessive, variant). Surface Manifold (S): The surface S(B) is covered by a dense vector field of keratin filaments (f). The density function ρ(f) over S is greater than a specified baseline ρ_min, defining the property IsFurry(B). Retractable Claws (K): B is equipped with a set of claws K, where the state of each element k ∈ K can be described by a binary function: State(k, t) ∈ {Retracted, Extended}. Axiom 1.3 (State Function): The state of c at any time t is given by the function S(t), which maps to a discrete set of primary states: S(t) ∈ {Sleeping, Hunting, Grooming, Demanding_Sustenance, Observing, State_of_Chaos} The probability distribution over these states is heavily skewed: P(S(t) = Sleeping) ≈ 0.65 P(S(t) = State_of_Chaos) can be modeled as a series of Dirac delta functions, δ(t - t₀), where t₀ frequently corresponds to 3:00 AM local time. 2. Behavioral Functions and PostulatesFunction 2.1 (Vocalization Operator, V): The cat c possesses a vocalization operator V that maps a set of input stimuli Σ to a set of acoustic outputs Ω. V: Σ → Ω where Ω = {Purr(ω, A), Meow(f, I), Hiss, Chirp, ∅}. Purr(ω, A) is a low-frequency oscillation (ω ≈ 25 Hz) of variable amplitude A, which paradoxically can signify either contentment or distress. Meow(f, I) is a function of frequency f and intensity I, typically used to signal a non-zero value for the Demand_Sustenance state. Postulate 2.2 (The Principle of Minimal Action): The cat c will, for any given objective, follow a path that minimizes action, where "action" is defined as caloric expenditure. This naturally leads to the high probability of the Sleeping state (see Axiom 1.3). This is suspended only during State_of_Chaos. Postulate 2.3 (The Observer Path Intersection Theorem): Let an Observer O move with a velocity vector V_O. The cat c will, with high probability, adjust its position vector P_c such that its projected path P_c(t + Δt) intersects P_O(t + Δt), maximizing the potential for the Observer to trip. Function 2.4 (Topological Deformation, Φ): A cat's body B is subject to a transformation Φ that allows it to occupy a container V_cont where the perceived volume of the cat Volume(B) appears to be greater than the volume of the container Volume(V_cont). Φ: B → V_cont such that B' ⊂ V_cont. This demonstrates that a cat can behave as a non-Newtonian fluid, filling the shape of its container. 3. Quantum and Metaphysical PrinciplesPrinciple 3.1 (The Schrödinger Operator of Intent, Ĥ_door): The state of a cat relative to a closed door is a quantum superposition. The cat's wavefunction |ψ⟩ is a linear combination of two eigenstates: |Wants_In⟩ and |Wants_Out⟩. |ψ⟩ = α|Wants_In⟩ + β|Wants_Out⟩, where |α|² + |β|² = 1. The act of an Observer opening the door constitutes a measurement, which collapses the wavefunction to one of the two states. An immediate subsequent measurement will show that the system has evolved into the orthogonal state with near-certainty. Principle 3.2 (The Multi-Life Hypothesis): The existence of c is not a scalar but a vector L in a 9-dimensional Hilbert space of "lives". L = (l₁, l₂, ..., l₉) A catastrophic event E acts as an operator that transitions the system from state l_i to l_{i+1}. The system is considered terminated only when an operator E is applied to the state l₉. ConclusionA cat c is a semi-autonomous, topologically deformable, quadrupedal entity governed by the principle of minimal action. Its behavior is a probabilistic function of its internal state, and its physical location relative to observers and barriers is subject to principles of quantum mechanics. It operates as a closed system for the majority of a 24-hour period, becoming an open system primarily to emit or receive matter and entropy (food, affection, chaos).

The "not even all of us" part of my previous post adresses this issue. 😄

Other animals do show a form of proto-morality or pre-morality, elephants are a good example of this but only H. sapiens has a fully developed moral compass and not even all of us. Hindus and Buddhists believe that morality is literally woven into the very fabric of the universe and that one's morality (karma) directly determines their rebirth (samsara) or lack of thereof (for those who have achieved Moksha or Nirvana*) - and this claim of theirs is far from being a proven fact. I agree that my previous statement about morality being unrelated to causality wasn't precise enough - they are interconnected but not as strongly as Hindus and Buddhist think. *Not the band.

Morality itself is an extremely recent invention - humans are the only organisms on Earth capable of it and we've only been around for 300,000 years while life on Earth is 3.4 bln years old at least. How would karma and samsara work for E. coli? Or Vibrio cholerae?

The consequences come from other people, not the laws of physics. If you argue otherwise and got good arguments to support your claims, you are in a position to cause a revolution in science more profound than the ones of Newton and Einstein. 😂

Hindus and Buddhists treat Karma and Samsara as if they were facts, like gravity, while in practice the evidence for their existence is... vastly less clear. Causality does feature prominently in physics but it has nothing to do with morality. Also add that what is considered moral varies quite significantly with place and time. For example, in Ancient Rome, killing a slave for trying to run away would be a perfectly moral thing to do. Subjecting the killer to negative karma would mean punishing them for breaking moral rules they were not even taught to follow - an act far brom being just.

The OT is not wrong for Christians, analogous to how old versions of the Polish Criminal Code are not wrong but simply no longer in force. The Old Testament was superseded by the New Testament and a lot of OT laws were abolished but for Christians knowledge of the Old Testament is still essential for understanding why Jesus came.

This specific way of reacting to feelings of humiliation clearly exists in the population, it wasn't swept out by either natural or sexual selection. The second one is particularly odd since a relationship with a narcissist is literally a nightmare.

Change your tone. I simply used the first word that came to my mind, I have no will to spend half an hour on perfecting the OP so it sounds properly. I have other, more pleasant things to do.

It's existence makes no sense to me. Narcissitm is a reaction to having a fragile, insecure ego full of shame, the organism reacts by building a grandiose false ego that then tries to bury the fragile true one as deep as possible. But why precisely does such a bizarre process take place? Why invent such a messy, flawed psychological solution when simply dialing up the activity in the Prefrontal Cortex (to dampen the overactive amygdala) would be enough? The individual in question would end up being much more resilient and at the same time dramatically less toxic to other people in their environment.

Yes, I am a materialist, although I consider most religious beliefs harmless at least. When it comes to promoting scientific thinking, a certain British gentleman is both much more motivated and much more skilled at this than I am. 😀

Recently I debated Buddhists and Hindus about certain metaphysical beliefs of theirs. I have great respect for both religions and their self-cultivation methods, I just disagree with the supernatural stuff. Their key argument was that my skepticism is meaningless because science was wrong before and when the germ theory was created, scientists initially rejected it (which is largely true). How would you guys counter it? Those two discussiosn were the first time I've debated religionists for over a decade.