iNow

I'm reminded of evolution discussions with creationists... "Since evolution says every mutation MUST be beneficial..." "No... that's not what it says. Please just stop." "It's a real shame everyone here can't accept that Darwin isn't a god and accept everything he says on faith!!!" Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

You're not off to a great start. Why would I hang around for more? Been there. Done that. Got the t-shirt. Summarized: Stop wasting time and bandwidth, please. Just to address this hanging turd... nobody accepts relativity because they're fanatics. Einstein is not Moses or Jesus quoted based on faith and indoctrination. Relativity is accepted because it works. It has passed EVERY test thrown at it for over a hundred years. End program. If a better model comes along, then it will be accepted as a better explanation or rejected for failure to be useful... NOT because someone other than his majesty the pope emperor Albert Einstein the Great said so.

You have permission of course, but you also have a practically zero chance of it actually being useful to absolutely anyone anywhere.

Then when you arrive at a model describing this which describes the behavior of our universe more accurately than current models, you will be a very famous person, indeed. Your name will be recorded in the history books, but not before.

Spacetime curvature IS gravity, so your question doesn't even make sense. You're not even wrong...

Iteration millions of millions of times per hour... over and over and over again. The only limitation here is processing power and speed of the underlying hardware. The system will be given a goal. It will then begin experimenting and failing trying to achieve it. With each failure and success, the systems model improves. In short, the AI will drive its own selection (in context of the goal that's been given it). Here's the basic idea presented in an extremely simple way for our simple human minds to grasp:

The whole thing is MAD

Putin himself has repeatedly said he wants to return to the days of the Soviet empire and that the worst day in his country’s history is when the Berlin Wall came down (he was stationed there as a part of the KBG and had to help burn documents in their embassy when it happened).

So you’re suggesting we could just send violators a strongly worded letter and move on with our day grateful to wash our hands of the threat? Some disgruntled Russian soldier tired of raping Ukrainian women might even trade some for a soft pack of smokes and a bottle or two of vodka.

How does one enforce a ban against a nuclear armed state without their own arsenal of similar force and capabilities?

You’ve repeated yourself an awful lot, dug in your heels, acted superior even while badly missing basic terms like refute and rebut, dismissed reasonable concerns and criticisms from others with the wave of a hand, remained largely obstinate, and convinced practically nobody here of the merits of your position, but hey! So long as you feel good about it all I suppose that’s all that really matters! You misspelled “addressing legitimate counterpoints.” Out of curiosity, would you plan to peg your cryptocurrency as a stable coin? Would you do fiat-backed, commodity-backed, or maybe just a non-collateralized algorithmic approach? Given your dogged and absolute reliance on fundamental free market determinism, these details matter quite a lot.

I caught a nasty case of the cost disease when I became a husband and father! /rimshot I'm in town all week, folks. Please be sure to tip your server.

It’s similar to Economies of Scale, but in this context I believe perhaps that Economies of Scope may be the concept you seek… even though both sorta fit. ✌🏼

This is why math is better for understanding these concepts than English, or even any nonmathematical human language more broadly. When I hear “field,” I think of mesh or matrix, perhaps even manifolds or membranes in some contexts. It’s a space made of stuff and the nature of the stuff is a different order of explanation. But English words are imprecise. So we use numbers and integrals and derivatives and relationships to make our understanding more clear. It’s still a map and not a territory whatever we do, even when using higher maths, so always take it with grain of salt and allow only provisional acceptance of anything.

What timepoint?

A full quote and some context would help. Sounds to me like you misheard / misread him, but he says all kinds of whacky shit while trying to popularize science so anything’s possible. Most galaxies seem to have supermassive blackholes at their center.

Nobody here is against disruption. Nobody here is adding their voice in support of failure. Cozy or otherwise, there is no consensus on that. The issue is your absolute faith that yours is the one true answer to the very real and very legitimate problems of public education which can and should be improved upon. Your view won’t work and it’s not fear or emotional attachment to the existing system causing me to tell you this plainly. You’re trying to treat an enormously complex system as a spherical cow, and you’re obstinate in the face of valid criticisms and concerns, trying to wave away feedback like some religious zealot. It’s a shame the school system failed you so miserably, but your proposal is no solution. I bet you wouldn’t even allow funding of the humanities. Sad really that someone as clearly intelligent as you can’t seem to see the enormous gaps and problems with this idea. Cozy consensus of failure. Give me a break and get off the soapbox already, preacher. With all this grinding, one would think your axe must be plenty sharp by now, yet it still fails to even cut mustard. Tell me you’ve never been around large groups of children without telling me you’ve never been around large groups of children 😂 Strange then that countries without universal healthcare also locked down. Were they also trying to protect your NHS?? Such an obviously flawed premise. One among many being spouted from your Randian pulpit. We’ll try to do better next time, preacher. Praise be!

Interesting how that’s half of 216. Perhaps a reference to this?

Where everyday just feels like Blursday. I believe the correct word for our OP is languishing.

I did, however, recently find some on clearance at JoAnn’s https://www.joann.com/astrological-cotton-canvas-fabric/18321687.html?gclid=CjwKCAjw0N6hBhAUEiwAXab-TTn-mCraW03z3MTILFdCdmJlRLMRnJpL9SJ152yyI1RlYN2K1JBdfxoC5U8QAvD_BwE

The keyword is heuristics

Faith sadly fails repeatedly when compared against reality

Stamps, but I reckon it’s easier to measure successful delivery of a parcel than successful rearing and enablement of a child, themselves a critical piece of the societal and economic puzzle.

Forgive me, but I'm not willing to allow our children's education to rely on gofundme This isn't a true market. "Shoppers" of education can't just move to different states. They have jobs, and families, and other things making the "shop around" concept you're relying upon a complete distraction. "Don't like your education? Just move to Finland!" It's not something which either scales (there are 50 MILLION students enrolled in US public schools) nor is it an accessible option to most (who on average have less than $1000 available to use even in dire emergencies). This is some Ayn Rand level of unrealistic fantasy silliness being shown here.

It runs into similar problems as private medical insurance. The focus becomes on increased margins and profits regardless of patient outcomes. Surely, this approach would do the same… squeezing costs at the expense of pupil preparation and readiness to contribute in a modern economy. It’s small minded. Missing forest for trees. Seems simple on paper, but is more of a preconceived conclusion in search of cherry picked supporting evidence instead of evidence in support of more effective outcomes.