My point is that although there is a ton of data that can be used, the data that we have currently will eventually run out, even if that takes many, many years. This is a very long-term thought experiment, and even if the problem of distinguishing between AI-generated content and human-produced content is never solved, this still probably wouldn't affect the advancement of AI within either of our lifetimes.
Origen's response: "What, James says, that man is not justified by faith alone, but also by works, does not at all militate against the preceding view. The reconciling of the two views depends chiefly on the drift of the argument pursued by James. For the question with him is not, how men attain righteousness before God, but how they prove to others that they are justified, for his object was to confute hypocrites, who vainly boasted that they had faith. Gross then is the sophistry, not to admit that the word, to justify, is taken in a different sense by James, from that in which it is used by Paul; for they handle different subjects. The word, faith, is also no doubt capable of various meanings. These two things must be taken to the account, before a correct judgment can be formed on the point. We may learn from the context, that James meant no more than that man is not made or proved to be just by a feigned or dead faith, and that he must prove his righteousness by his works. See on this subject my Institutes."
I do not understand why being able to define colours in terms of wavelengths would enable all animals to perceive the same colours.
If colors had a real existence defined by their wavelengths, then all animals would see the same colors when looking at the same wavelengths, but this is not true. If an animal looks at a tree, no matter what color it perceives it as, it is still looking at a tree. But when an animal looks at a tree, and the wavelengths give rise to colors, they do not all see the same colors even if they are seeing the same tree. To elaborate, all animals would be able to look at a tree and know that it has leaves, but not all animals would think that those leaves are green. This means that when we say "the leaves of a tree are green", we are simply describing our mental understanding of it; my argument is that colors are mental, and lack a real existence, but they are still grounded in reality (that is to say, the greenness of a thing is simply our perception of certain wavelengths of light possessed by objects, which means that colors are not intrinsic.)
Yes, physical phenomena give rise to our perceptions of colors, but this doesn't mean that colors can be defined along these lines; if that were the case, all species would be able to see the exact same colors (in other words, a wavelength doesn't actually have a color until a being interprets it as having one).
Just another example of western nonsense infecting anime like a plague
What "objectionable content" is even on this site lol
It probably means fascinated.
I like Hanabie, very good band. This is my favorite song of theirs, probably because it's what introduced me to them.
Posting this because I thought that people might not know about it.
I prefer the Playstation controller because of where the thumbsticks are placed, so I recommend it.
For men, yes. For women, no.
My point is that although there is a ton of data that can be used, the data that we have currently will eventually run out, even if that takes many, many years. This is a very long-term thought experiment, and even if the problem of distinguishing between AI-generated content and human-produced content is never solved, this still probably wouldn't affect the advancement of AI within either of our lifetimes.
I check this site frequently, although not every day. I definitely use it at a minimum of once a week though.
It starts airing in October.
Hopefully the new director can do well.
Don't put your info on a doc, it's not secure enough. It would be easy to find your info, and I don't doubt that a hacker would get it.
Origen's response: "What, James says, that man is not justified by faith alone, but also by works, does not at all militate against the preceding view. The reconciling of the two views depends chiefly on the drift of the argument pursued by James. For the question with him is not, how men attain righteousness before God, but how they prove to others that they are justified, for his object was to confute hypocrites, who vainly boasted that they had faith. Gross then is the sophistry, not to admit that the word, to justify, is taken in a different sense by James, from that in which it is used by Paul; for they handle different subjects. The word, faith, is also no doubt capable of various meanings. These two things must be taken to the account, before a correct judgment can be formed on the point. We may learn from the context, that James meant no more than that man is not made or proved to be just by a feigned or dead faith, and that he must prove his righteousness by his works. See on this subject my Institutes."
I thought you were an Asian woman, not a black gangster
Pause = Deviant
Rewind = Smart
Fast Forward = Suicidal
Decline = Ethical
Special Announcement
test a doodle do
DS, Wii, and 8DX are the only ones I've played. I used to love playing Wii as a kid, so it's a very nostalgia-inducing game for me
Mario Kart 8 Deluxe
I've been playing a lot of Mario Kart recently
I used to think that goblins lived in the basement, and that they would steal things from me in the night.
Do the opposite of what AnneBoonchy said
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠟⠛⠛⠛⠋⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠙⠛⠛⠛⠿⠻⠿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡀⠠⠤⠒⢂⣉⣉⣉⣑⣒⣒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠀⠀⠐⠒⠚⠻⠿⠿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠏⠀⠀⠀⠀⡠⠔⠉⣀⠔⠒⠉⣀⣀⠀⠀⠀⣀⡀⠈⠉⠑⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠈⠉⠉⠉⠁⠂⠀⠈⠙⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠇⠀⠀⠀⠔⠁⠠⠖⠡⠔⠊⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠐⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠲⢄⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠊⠀⢀⣀⣤⣤⣤⣤⣀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠜⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⡀⠀⠈⠃⠀⠀⠀⠸⣿⣿⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠥⠐⠂⠀⠀⠀⠀⡄⠀⠰⢺⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣟⠀⠈⠐⢤⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⣶⣾⣯⠀⠀⠉⠂⠀⠠⠤⢄⣀⠙⢿⣿⣿
⣿⡿⠋⠡⠐⠈⣉⠭⠤⠤⢄⡀⠈⠀⠈⠁⠉⠁⡠⠀⠀⠀⠉⠐⠠⠔⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠲⣿⠿⠛⠛⠓⠒⠂⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠠⡉⢢⠙⣿
⣿⠀⢀⠁⠀⠊⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠁⠒⠂⠀⠒⠊⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⡠⠔⠒⠒⠂⠀⠈⠀⡇⣿
⣿⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⡠⠋⠓⠤⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠢⠤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⠀⠀⠀⡠⠀⡇⣿
⣿⡀⠘⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡄⠀⠀⠀⠈⠑⡦⢄⣀⠀⠀⠐⠒⠁⢸⠀⠀⠠⠒⠄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⠇⠀⣀⡀⠀⠀⢀⢾⡆⠀⠈⡀⠎⣸⣿
⣿⣿⣄⡈⠢⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⣶⣄⡀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠈⠉⠒⠢⡤⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠐⠦⠤⠒⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⢴⠁⠀⢷⠀⠀⠀⢰⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣇⠂⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢂⠀⠈⠹⡧⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠉⠉⠉⢱⠒⠒⠒⠒⢖⠒⠒⠂⠙⠏⠀⠘⡀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠑⠄⠰⠀⠀⠁⠐⠲⣤⣴⣄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⠀⣠⣷⣶⣿⠀⠀⢰⣿⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠁⢀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡙⠋⠙⠓⠲⢤⣤⣷⣤⣤⣤⣤⣾⣦⣤⣤⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⢹⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠑⠀⢄⠀⡰⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠉⠁⠈⠉⠻⠋⠉⠛⢛⠉⠉⢹⠁⢀⢇⠎⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣦⣀⠈⠢⢄⡉⠂⠄⡀⠀⠈⠒⠢⠄⠀⢀⣀⣀⣰⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡀⠀⢀⣎⠀⠼⠊⠀⠀⠀⠘⣿⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣄⡀⠉⠢⢄⡈⠑⠢⢄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠁⠀⠀⢀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢻⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣦⣀⡈⠑⠢⢄⡀⠈⠑⠒⠤⠄⣀⣀⠀⠉⠉⠉⠉⠀⠀⠀⣀⡀⠤⠂⠁⠀⢀⠆⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣦⣄⡀⠁⠉⠒⠂⠤⠤⣀⣀⣉⡉⠉⠉⠉⠉⢀⣀⣀⡠⠤⠒⠈⠀⠀⠀⠀⣸⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣶⣤⣄⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣰⣿⣿⣿
⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⣶⣶⣶⣤⣤⣤⣤⣀⣀⣤⣤⣤⣶⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿
https://mainchan.com/s/askmainchan/2661/whats-the-worst-thing-a-girl-has-ever-said-to-you/?commentID=5900
I always get a ton of nosebleeds during winter. I once had my nose bleed for over an hour.
If colors had a real existence defined by their wavelengths, then all animals would see the same colors when looking at the same wavelengths, but this is not true. If an animal looks at a tree, no matter what color it perceives it as, it is still looking at a tree. But when an animal looks at a tree, and the wavelengths give rise to colors, they do not all see the same colors even if they are seeing the same tree. To elaborate, all animals would be able to look at a tree and know that it has leaves, but not all animals would think that those leaves are green. This means that when we say "the leaves of a tree are green", we are simply describing our mental understanding of it; my argument is that colors are mental, and lack a real existence, but they are still grounded in reality (that is to say, the greenness of a thing is simply our perception of certain wavelengths of light possessed by objects, which means that colors are not intrinsic.)
Yes, physical phenomena give rise to our perceptions of colors, but this doesn't mean that colors can be defined along these lines; if that were the case, all species would be able to see the exact same colors (in other words, a wavelength doesn't actually have a color until a being interprets it as having one).