> (problem description) your agent […] makes confident assumptions
> (solution description) when it’s unsure
I read this as a contradiction: in one sentence you describe the problem as an agent being confident while hallucinating and in the next phrase the solution is that the agent can ask you if it’s unsure.
You tool is interesting but you may consider rephrasing that part.
I've done ten's of carving by gluing thin layers in a mold to create carved plywood. Those are extra strong but required to use quite a lot of glue and get the right thickness wood veneers. Would love to learn the solid board way.
edit: fined tuned my English today: seems carving means sculpting and not bending.
In my chairs I just sculpt the back out of eight quarter with an angle grinder. More production focused wood workers are using multi-axis routers/cncs.
The english term for what you are referring to in bent lamination which is done by taking a piece of wood, slicing it to sections with a thin kerf blade, soaking in water, and then clamping to a form and gluing back together. This is how Russ Filbeck creates his classic presidential rocker.
And you can bend surprisingly thick wood with steam. I attended a demonstration where someone bent a maple 2 by 4 (1.5" x 3.5"). It took about 6 people and two tries (the first one splintered, probably not steamed enough).
It's fascinating how visceral the reactions are when someone introduce a comparaisons between humans and other animals, that doesn’t start with the conclusion that humans are superiors anyway.
There’s reflections done around the term Speciesism (and anti-speciesism) and most people today stands for speciesism.
Interestingly the reflection is close to the debate on racism and anti-racism (where most people settled to anti racism to the point there isn’t much debate anymore), but race is only an informal classification that don’t hold much meaning in biological term, contrary to species.
Neuroelectron comment is provocative. I think he wants to demonstrate the absurdity to let consumer choices resolves value delivered to customers. A bit the same the same as I did in a peer comment, but way more implicit.
Consider someone starts a slavery business that grab easily pickable children to raise them as perfect specialized workers then put the to the free sell/rent market.
End users could choose for other "moral" alternative if they wish. One even could point out that already happen in some parts of the world and that helps happy customers to solve their needs.
However most people prefer to contraint others wallet usage to enforce certain ethic rules. Where to place the line of ethics/constraint is very cultural dependent - to its wide definition.
One way to handle that is to look profitability for citizen instead of customers, then what's profitable for Uber users should be balanced with what's profitable for Uber drivers. That is usually what people want from a gouvernements and laws (and I guess we both agree that is not the same as what is profitable for business).
Given how much it’s been discussed over human history… it seems very likely that does not exist. And is yet another dispute that has to be decided via the political process in the first place.
> unionization [...] is not allowed to by our laws.
Ok sure but laws can changes, right ? And that previous sentence is itself protected by the law ? I understand your pessimism but that's not to be confused with fatalism.
Related: Interpol urges to stop using "Pig Butchering":
> INTERPOL argues that the term ‘pig butchering’ dehumanizes and shames victims of such frauds, deterring people from coming forward to seek help and provide information to the authorities.
The cost world you describe didn’t emerge because of fear of god (which has been prevalent for milleniums, mostly everywhere) but the abondance of cheap energy and goods, basically since oil starts getting processed but other minor factors helped too. Democracy and peace emerges when peoples aren’t scared to miss food anymore.
In the US food is plentiful. Poor people die of obesity related illness. But trust is plummeting because of a decline in social cohesion. Building a high trust society is hard, and there is no monocausal solution. You can't plug in god, or food, into a low trust society to flip it to high trust.
During the initial pandemic, great strides were made in the United States to mitigate childhood poverty, but these measures were quickly overturned. Now the administration wants to defund SNAP and other food security programs. Alas.
> (problem description) your agent […] makes confident assumptions
> (solution description) when it’s unsure
I read this as a contradiction: in one sentence you describe the problem as an agent being confident while hallucinating and in the next phrase the solution is that the agent can ask you if it’s unsure.
You tool is interesting but you may consider rephrasing that part.