blakestacey

I copied this over to the recommendations thread for actual-science versions of things that the Sequences gesture incompetently at.

Here is a comment by corbin with relevant recommendations:

Gödel makes everyone weep. For tears of joy, my top pick is still Doug Hofstadter's Gödel, Escher, Bach, which is suitable for undergraduates. Another strong classic is Raymond Smullyan's To Mock a Mockingbird. Both of these dead-trees are worth it; I personally find myself cracking them open regularly for citations, quotes, and insights. For tears of frustration, the best way to fully understand the numerical machinery is Peter Smith's An Introduction to Gödel's Theorems, freely available online. These books are still receiving new editions, but any edition should suffice. If the goal is merely to ensure that the student can diagonalize, then the student can directly read Bill Lawvere's 1968 paper Diagonal arguments & Cartesian closed categories with undergraduate category theory, but in any case they should also read Noson Yanofsky's 2003 expository paper A universal approach to self-referential paradoxes, incompleteness & fixed points. The easiest options are at the beginning of the paragraph and the hardest ones are at the end; nonetheless any option will cover Cantor, Russell, Gödel, Turing, Tarski, and the essentials of diagonalization.

And picking that as a username is... "I know I'm a grown man, but inside I am 12 years old, and when I grow up nerds will be cool, you'll see!".

Dang, I am missing a lot due to eating junk food instead of fast food.

Well, not all of the comments there are horrible. Though there is a guy calling himself "richardfeynman" saying some pretty silly stuff. His prior comment history is full of promptfondling.

There could be other "into the locker now" signals that are as strong as calling yourself "richardfeynman" on Hacker News, but I cannot think of a stronger one.

Variations on this theme have probably come up repeatedly in promptfondler circles.

Ah, gotcha.

No, that's not what superdeterminism is. You are importing a whole lot of baggage about what it means to understand things "as quantum mechanical systems". You are also making the same mistake that Tim Maudlin does about the implications of Bell inequality violations. He thinks that the EPR criterion of reality is "analytically" true, and he's wrong. Since you have recommended Maudlin elsewhere on Lemmy (as well as promulgating the myth that a singular "Copenhagen interpretation" exists), I'm going to do something else than try conversing with you further.

Something is missing here:

damages their users’ critical thinking and mental acuity whilst , all

The very unscientific sampling I did just now suggests that those complexity classes which Wikipedia covers, it covers better than the Zoo does anything. Of course, the Zoo has room for #P/lowpoly and LOGWANK and all the other classes that are attested in one paper apiece.

And we don’t want to introduce all the complexities of solving disagreements on Wikipedia.

wait for it

There should also be some kind of support for multiple AIs disagreeing with each other.

"The Torment Nexus definitely has positive uses. I personally use it frequently for looking up song lyrics and tracking my children's medication doses. I find it helpful."