#scott aaronson

[khadrimxart]

Some Iron Clad sketches. An irate Pepper Potts, a drawing of Scott Aaronson so maybe we can sorta see what Scarlett saw in him lol, and Natasha Romanoff. It's fun to put it up against old drawings to see how far I've come.

[warningsine]

In summary, maybe it's true that humans (if we survive long enough) will eventually outgrow religion, now that we have something better to fill religion's explanatory role. But before that will happen, I think that at the least we'll need to better understand the social functions that religion played for most of history and still plays in most of the world, and maybe come up with alternative social mechanisms to solve the same sorts of problem.

Scott Aaronson, Quantum Computing Since Democritus

[reactionaryhistorian]

 An interesting write-up. I think it’s probable he is talking about the recent google incident. I’m not convinced the situation is bad enough to make a Kolmogorov  approach justified, at least not for me, its not like anyone’s lives are in danger, but it is encouraging to think that many people might be.

[definitelynotscott]

[philippesaner]

I wonder what it is about Scott Aaronson that makes a certain brand of horrible person take their masks off.

I've seen a fair number of cruel and dishonest people who can normally use left-wing politics to hide or justify their awfulness, except when Scott Aaronson is involved. They talk to or about him and the lies get obvious, the motives come out into the open.

[metastable1]

Counterarguments to Penrose's position on AI. Also, I recommend this short excerpt from interview with Scott Aaronson in regards to his claims about consciousness.

Aaronson's "The Gödel CAPTCHA"

Notes from Aaronson's lecture about the argument.

Turing countering this sort of argument already in his 1950 paper:

[averycanadianfilm]

FAQ on Microsoft’s topological qubit thing

Q1. Did you see Microsoft’s announcement?A. Yes, thanks, you can stop emailing to ask! Microsoft’s Chetan Nayak was even kind enough to give

Scott writes: '[Update: Commenters point out to me that buried in Nature‘s review materials is the following striking passage: “The editorial team wishes to point out that the results in this manuscript do not represent evidence for the presence of Majorana zero modes in the reported devices. The work is published for introducing a device architecture that might enable fusion experiments using future Majorana zero modes.” So, the situation is that Microsoft is unambiguously claiming to have created a topological qubit, and they just published a relevant paper in Nature, but their claim to have created a topological qubit has not yet been accepted by Nature‘s peer review.]'

[averycanadianfilm]

Straight Talk on Quantum Computing