Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
zk
ParticipantThanks, frankdrebin, I really appreciate the insights.
This might be (probably is) another indicator of my lack of knowledge of how AI works, but if they’re trying to fix the text/image divide, are they trying to fix the text//math/logic divide also? Seems more important.
ParticipantThanks, Detective Drebin (love that character). Some great insight there.
It makes sense that, if the way these models are trained is to guess the next word in a sentence, they wouldn’t necessarily be great at math/logic. I’d heard that this was how AI operates, but the idea that that’s how AI learns and operates makes very little sense to me. It seems like a terrible way to create an artificial intelligence. Predict the next word? Without considering anything further out than that? Why? Why not consider where the sentence is going, where the paragraph is going, where the topic is going, where society is going, where humans are going? Why not endow it with all the knowledge (including math/logic knowledge) humans have accumulated?
In addition to not making sense to me, the fact that AI can create images indicated to me that there has to be more to it than just predicting the next word. So I assumed that I had misunderstood this thing I’d heard about “predict the next word” being how AI operates. I assumed that there was more to it than predicting the next word, and I assumed that of course you would endow your AI with logic/math/reasoning skills (and other knowledge) right from the start.
I imagine you (frankdrebin) are reading this and thinking, “boy, this guy really doesn’t understand much about AI.” And you’d be right. I don’t. And it’s kinda been bugging me and I’d really like to understand it more. Any misconceptions you could clear up or questions you could answer would be much appreciated.
ParticipantInteresting analogy with the kid.
I don’t know who’s training AI, but if AI is trying to learn from your average schmo on his computer, it’s going to grow up to be a pretty ignorant and maladjusted adult.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]
More drivel.
[/quote]
You’re unable to refute (or even address) any of my points with data. I guess there’s really nothing for you to do but come back with “more drivel.” Weak.
[quote=sdrealtor]
You are clutching at pearls.
[/quote]
Either you don’t know what that phrase means, or your comprehension is very poor.
From the Cambridge dictionary: “to behave as if you are very shocked, especially when you show more shock than you really feel in order to show that you think something is morally bad.”
I’m not “very shocked.” I’m not shocked at all. I’m not even surprised. You’re making claims not based on data, and you’re being a jackass. I’m pointing those things out. No shock involved.
[quote=sdrealtor]
EP and his anti CA rhetoric is about people fleeing here and the red state destinations continuing to boom. What is happening in the 3 msa’s of UT is happening south of SG in vegas. And in Nashville and in Idaho and in Phoenix. He provides no data just platitudes
[/quote]You’re making claims about St. George with zero data about St. George. And being a jackass doing it. That’s what I’m saying, and so far you have been unable to refute any of that.
[quote=sdrealtor]
which ironically seem to fly in the face of your leaning as well.
[/quote]
If by that you mean that I disagree with EP’s opinions about California, I do (in general). What do my opinions of EP’s opinions about California have to do with whether or not you’re making data-supported arguments about the St. George real estate market?
[quote=sdrealtor]
Based upon your comments re dz it’s clear this was not a one time fly by.
[/quote]
I didn’t say it was a one-time flyby. I said you made an erroneous assumption about me “lurking regularly.” In any case, with a single visit to the forum it would be easy to see that dz got kicked off and that a couple days later you dug up an old thread and started being a jackass to someone else.
[quote=sdrealtor]
No one believes your bs that you’re not following closer than you want to admit.
[/quote]
Ha! You probably really do believe that you speak for everyone. Get over yourself, man!
[quote=sdrealtor]
If you went to contribute something meaningful to our real estate discussion please have at it.
[/quote]
I think that pointing out that you make claims without data and that you are gratuitously noxious is contributing to the discussion.
—–
Man, too bad that whole “ignore” thing isn’t working out for you.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]
Welcome back and good to see you still lurking regularly
[/quote]
You assume I lurk regularly. You make a lot of erroneous assumptions.
[quote=sdrealtor]
If my true colors are taking EP to task for throwing CA (which created great wealth for him and his family for decades) under the bus because he disagrees with it politically i’ll wear those proudly every time!
[/quote]
Ha! No, your true colors aren’t taking EP to task for throwing CA under the bus. Your true colors are claiming “game, set match” with nothing to back it up, and being condescending and disputatious while you’re doing it.
[quote=sdrealtor]
If you took the time to actually read you’d see I mentioned Sacto earlier and specifically why I did not include it as it bears a lot more in common with places like UT, Id, AZ, TN, LV etc than SoCal or the Bay Area.
[/quote]
Again, an erroneous assumption (that I didn’t see you’d mentioned Sacramento earlier). You say real estate is local. You bust that out frequently when somebody tries to use non-local data to make a point. Encinitas is not Escondido. But St. George is the same as Salt Lake City? Is real estate not local anymore?
[quote=sdrealtor]
Those 3 Utah MSA’s make up well over 80% of the population of UT and are very representative of what is happening all over Utah including St George which is just too small to be followed by the major data collectors.
[/quote]
A bold and quite possibly erroneous assumption. Yet stated as fact. Do you think nobody notices that? Or are you so high on your opinions that you think of them as facts?
[quote=sdrealtor]
The entire SG metro is no bigger than Oceanside and I’d bet $$ to donuts it will follow what is happening in the rest of the reported UT areas as there is no industry to support what has happened there with RE
[/quote]
The entire of the SG metro area is no bigger than Oceanside, but you’d still bet that the same thing is happening there as is happening in a much larger metro area (Salt Lake City) 300 miles away? And you’re giving odds, too? You are certainly free to make that wager. But it doesn’t fly to claim “game, set and match” based on zero data for St. George and nothing but leading indicators from a much larger metro area clear across the state.
[quote=sdrealtor]
As for this thread and EP this thread stays active and pops up regularly.
[/quote]
Ok, if 4 months with no activity is “active.”
[quote=sdrealtor]
where we divurge is perpetual attacks on CA wihtou ever bringing a single data point[/quote]
Given that you’re taking jabs at St. George without a single data point, I’d say the word you were looking for wasn’t “divurge” but “converge.”
You know, if you’d said, “there’s a general trend of leading indicators going in the wrong direction in areas similar to St. George, so it’s possible or maybe likely that St. George will see a downturn soon,” that would be one thing. An argument could be made that it might even be reasonable, even though it goes against your beloved trope that “real estate is local.” But, no, you come out with “game, set match.” Again, your true colors. Claiming victories not won. Being condescending. Tooting your own horn and not hearing that your horn sounds off-key and raspy.
[quote=sdrealtor]
Back on ignore list you go[/quote]
[quote=zk]
Oh, no! You’re going to ignore me! What shall I ever do without your attention?!
Oh, wait, never mind. If I actually gave a damn, I wouldn’t need to worry. You won’t ignore me. You’re not capable of it.[/quote]
Well, you lasted for about two of my posts before you couldn’t resist. Can’t say I didn’t see that coming!
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Never said that but keep believing I did while your rent climbs. Real estate is local. It’s different everywhere. I only care what is happening locally. What happens elsewhere? It’s not my problem
[/quote](bolding is mine)
[quote=sdrealtor][quote=EconProf][quote=sdrealtor]Wonder what’s going on in St George beyond 100 degree weather?[/quote]
Answer: still flocking here in big numbers, esp. from CA.
About that weather, two factoids. We are higher in elevation than Phoenix and Las Vegas–both at about sea level–so are a bit cooler. And we have a big temperature swing between the day’s high and low. So people jog and bike ride in a.m., not mid-afternoon. Secondly, the hotter temperatures in those two big cities does not seem to be deterring Californians from moving in big numbers to those cities. Gosh, I wonder why that is?[/quote]Wonder no more! Here is what is going on in Utah!
No market out west is weakening harder and faster than the Utah metro areas and of course St George has gotta be right there with them.
My favorite quote in the article came at the very end!
“The trend has started to reverse in both places, with Salt Lake City seeing a net outflow (more Redfin.com users looking to leave than move in) for the first time on record in the first quarter,” Redfin reported.
Game, Set, Match[/quote]
Yeah, real estate is local. Except when you use an article that has data for Provo, Salt Lake City, and Ogden (and no other places in Utah) to make a point about St. George. Sacramento is on that list, too. If someone had tried to use that to make a point about the market in San Diego, you’d be wearing out the LOL keys on your keyboard.
dz gets kicked off, and you can’t go for more than a couple days without throwing jabs at somebody, so you dig this old thread up and use irrelevant data to claim “game, set match.” Showing your true colors, sdrealtor.
ParticipantReminds me of this classic from the Dick Van Dyke Show.
Participant“don’t think about money,” he said gently as he did the Jedi mind trick hand wave and billed you at $250/hour.
Participant“Lotsa cream, lotsa sugar.”
One of my favorite lines from Pulp Fiction.
March 8, 2022 at 5:53 PM in reply to: Ot. Nothing to see here, just a nuclear plant bombed and on fire… #824193Participant[quote=The-Shoveler]1 in 10 chance.
Wow that’s kind of unsettling[/quote]
1 in 10 chance of what? (And according to who?)
March 5, 2022 at 5:01 PM in reply to: Ot. Nothing to see here, just a nuclear plant bombed and on fire… #824091Participant[quote=XBoxBoy]And my biggest point here is that you are trying to look at this situation with the expectation that the participants will act rationally. [/quote]
Not sure what I wrote that gave you that impression, but whatever it was, I certainly don’t expect rational behavior from putin or from any Russian people who have been exposed to enough propaganda. I think the only possible reason that they wouldn’t turn on putin in the face of massive economic pain is because they’ve been deceived by propaganda. Of course, Russians turning on putin would only happen if the sanctions are as effective as I think they’ll be. If you are right and I am wrong about the sanctions, the situation (for the world, but not for Ukraine) isn’t as dire.
I probably did overstate even my own position when I said Russia couldn’t “survive” the sanctions and that their economy would be “devastated.” But short of extinction or devastation, there are many levels of pain. At what level of pain, if any, does the pain become a problem for putin’s grip on the country?
Your position is that whatever level that is, the sanctions aren’t likely to bring us to that level (if I read correctly). I don’t know whether to root for that or not. If the sanctions cause enough pain, maybe they compel putin to give up and leave Ukraine (extremely doubtful), or maybe they compel the oligarchs or the military or the KGB (or the Russian people, if they’re able) to get rid of putin. But in the devastating-sanctions scenario there is also the risk that putin is pushed to a breaking point and he pushes the button. If the sanctions don’t cause enough pain, Ukraine stays occupied and putin stays in power.
The only reasonably likely scenario that I can think of that is not terrible (terrible being, at a minimum, Ukranian loss of soveriegnty, many Ukranian and Russian war deaths, economic pain for the Russian people and, to a lesser degree, economic pain for Russia’s trading partners) is somebody getting rid of putin.
March 5, 2022 at 9:24 AM in reply to: Ot. Nothing to see here, just a nuclear plant bombed and on fire… #824084ParticipantI’m less worried about that nuclear power plant than I am about putin being backed into a corner and starting a nuclear war. I’m not 100% sure I buy what all the pundits are saying about putin being “different” from before and possibly unstable. But it definitely seems possible.
He has said (paraphrasing) “what good is the world without Russia in it?” And he clearly doesn’t give a fuck about killing women and babies for no reason other than the glory of his beloved Soviet Union – oops, I mean Russia. What if he sees that before long the economic sanctions are going to ruin his country? What if he senses that the oligarchs are going to turn on him? In what way could the oligarchs turn on him besides assassinating him? It doesn’t seem at all unlikely that he will soon conclude that it’s him or all of us. Would he push the button then? Would somebody stop him?
What are the chances that putin just gives up and retreats? Practically zero, I would guess. I think the most likely outcome is an occupation of Ukraine by putin. No revelation there. But then what? Between economic sanctions and the costs of war, Russia can’t economically survive for long. I have no idea whether the oligarchs will put up with that, and I don’t really know whether or not they have both the capability and the huevos to assasinate putin. If they don’t, then what? Putin just watches his country die while his citizens turn against him? Propaganda is a strong force, especially in Russia. I suppose it’s possible that his citizens, deceived by his propaganda, won’t think it’s his fault in sufficient numbers and with sufficient energy to do anything about it. Whether they turn against him or not, though, the country will be economically devastated within, I don’t know, a couple years anyway. Is putin just going to sit there and let that happen? Will he just sit there knowing he failed to do anything but ruin two countries, including his beloved Russia? More worryingly, will he, at some point, see all of this ahead of him and lash out before all that happens?
Putin is obviously a psychopath. Fellow psychopaths stalin and hitler (and others throughout history) had no problem killing millions of people for the glory of their state (or their ego, or their race, or whatever really drove them). Does it matter to a psycopath like that if its several million or several billion?
All that said, I would still put the risk of global nuclear war in the next 2 years at maybe 1 in 300. Which is up an awful lot from the 1 in 10,000 odds I’d have estimated a year ago.
I’m no expert on any of this, so I don’t really know if any of the above even makes sense in real life. And I would like to hear others’ opinions. But it makes sense to me.
I have always been the opposite of these guys who always think the apocalypse is coming. Storing guns and ammo and learning survival techniques. But a 1 in 300 chance was enough to prompt me to buy a fishing net and a shotgun. It turns out I already have a lot of other things that would be helpful to survive such a scenario. Looking into water stills or other purification methods. $400 total for a shotgun and a fishing net (and a few other things) seems like cheap insurance. Of course, I’d have to survive the attacks for any of this to matter. But it’s possible that we’d see it coming a day or two in advance and have time to get out of dodge (away from Miramar, Camp Pendleton, North Island, etc).
One more fact about putin. He’s been reported to be fascinated with Russia’s nuclear armaments. An unstable psychopath, fascinated with nuclear weapons and determined to return Russia to glory, backed into a corner with no way out of disaster for his beloved Russia, which he thinks the world is worthless without. For a few hundred bucks that I’ll never miss, I’ll give my family a little bit better odds of surviving a worst-case scenario.
Participant[quote=gzz]
The decline in spending on travel, entertainment, and the like is temporary, so the “nothing else to spend it on” effect has already diminished and will disappear entirely.
I disagree that we’ll ever get back to pre-COVID levels on a lot of these issues.
[/quote]
I think there’s an awful lot of pent up demand for such things. I and a lot of people I know are busting out of this confinement we’ve been enduring with renewed appreciation for getting out there and doing…anything but sitting around at home. I’m definitely spending on those things at a higher rate now than pre-covid.
[quote=gzz]
I am tightwad, so I looked used before buying my $9200 elliptical (now $10,200)…
Precor AMT 835 Adaptive Motion Trainer
[/quote]Gym-quality ellipticals are built tough, and that should last you forever. I bought mine:
https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/lifefitness-front-drive-elliptical-149194656
in 2006. I bought it used and I’ve been using it (very vigorously) 3-4 times a week for 15 years with not so much as a hiccup. Before I bought that one, I bought an elliptical at Walmart for $250. The frame snapped at a weld (during an interval peak) on the last day of the (30-day?) warranty. I don’t think those cheap ones are even really meant to be used seriously.
Participant[quote=sdrealtor]Nice attempted political thread jack.
[/quote]Political thread jack? You’re kidding, right? Whenever you and I get into a discussion lately, you try to get by on bluster and attitude because you have no winning arguments, but to accuse me of a “political thread jack” is a new low in your usage of bluster over content. This entire thread is political. The OP was political. The responses are appropriately political.
[quote=sdrealtor]I am talking about the economy here not the pandemic [/quote]
The entire thread is about politics. About how worrisome the current political issues are for our future. Political doomsaying.
From the OP:
This general (partisan) direction of Truthiness & losing trust in media institutions worries me more that most ills of the US today, since I have trouble envisioning how it unwinds itself..
You come on this political doomsaying thread and, after I (and others) chimed in on the political doomsaying, you say, “Yup the doomsayers are essentially winless around here.” You don’t give any hint that you’re talking about the economy – here on this thread about political doomsaying where no economic predictions had even been made. Then you accuse me of a political threadjack when I point out, perfectly in line with the original post and with the thread in general, the political doom – specifically doom related to misinformation, as discussed in the OP – that has already happened. By no standard is that a political threadjack. Calling it one is perfectly in line with your tiresome method of bluster over content.
[quote=sdrealtor]
Back on ignore list you go[/quote]Oh, no! You’re going to ignore me! What shall I ever do without your attention?!
Oh, wait, never mind. If I actually gave a damn, I wouldn’t need to worry. You won’t ignore me. You’re not capable of it.
-
AuthorPosts