![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/1f910de9-62b5-43a9-8c93-94821c945577.png)
I think it only reads the first FIFTY characters 😱
I think it only reads the first FIFTY characters 😱
she begin asking a series of pointed questions: “What would you do if you found out that I was gone?”, “What would you do if the CCTV on our street is broken by chance?”, “What would you tell my mother if I went missing?”, “If I was actually kidnapped, would you kill the guy for me?”
Yeah these sound like tests.
I was thinking the same.
Can anyone check the code and verify?
Coz if [the first 60 characters of a long password] has the same hash as [the long password], something is fishy.
does its length intimidate you?
The ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class.
When people speak of the ideas that revolutionise society, they do but express that fact that within the old society the elements of a new one have been created, and that the dissolution of the old ideas keeps even pace with the dissolution of the old conditions of existence.
When the ancient world was in its last throes, the ancient religions were overcome by Christianity. When Christian ideas succumbed in the 18th century to rationalist ideas, feudal society fought its death battle with the then revolutionary bourgeoisie. The ideas of religious liberty and freedom of conscience merely gave expression to the sway of free competition within the domain of knowledge.
It’s GPT-4 to tell the truth.
Not sure it’ll do the tasks you list at the start but it’s the front runner.
Nice try copper.
deleted by creator
I mean, if the bias was based on skin-colour or sex, would you feel differently about it?
No, because it’s circular logic.
It is, and that’s inherent in the problem under consideration, the problem of the ‘uncaused caused’ or the ‘first mover’. Logic can either be A) circular or B) not-circular. Any not-circular logic must explain each element by referring to a prior, but then you’ve got an infinite regress. So you’re trapped in a dilemma: do you want the circular logic or the infinite regress? Liebniz’s choice was to say that God was inherently existent, like when Lao Tzu said 道法 自然
There’s no reason for a necessary being to exist before it does
Correct. It is necessary: it is self-causing. It does not stand upon a ‘reason’, unlike everything else in conditioned existence.
to exist before it does
You’re assuming it is subject to the laws of linear time and causation, and point out how that assumption leads to a contradiction. But Liebniz’s God is not subject to the laws of linear time and causation. Which is the whole point of positing it: because if it were subject to those laws: infinite regress.
and no evidence that one does in the real world.
Well the world exists, so all this existence must have some cause. That was the starting point of the conversation: Why is there something instead of nothing?
I was complaining about this on [email protected]
About 10% of pop culture stories, maybe more, are about billionaires. Are 10% of people billionaires?
And even in a medieval fantasy settings, it’s about gold-decked kings: the billionaires of the setting.
It’s to perpetuate a class bias.
Well Liebniz said it’s because of a necessary being bearing the reason for its existence within itself, if that helps.
correct take