• 0 Posts
  • 48 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 15th, 2023

help-circle





  • Nope just ran it did exactly as I said.

    gpt output

    Full output:

    Finding a SHA-512 hash with 12 leading zeros is computationally intensive and typically involves a process known as “proof of work” where many hashes are computed until one with the desired property is found. Here’s an example Python script that performs this task:

    import hashlib
    import itertools
    
    def find_hash_with_leading_zeros(prefix, leading_zeros=12):
        target = '0' * leading_zeros
        for nonce in itertools.count():
            text = prefix + str(nonce)
            hash_result = hashlib.sha512(text.encode()).hexdigest()
            if hash_result.startswith(target):
                return text, hash_result
    
    prefix = "your_prefix_here"
    result_text, result_hash = find_hash_with_leading_zeros(prefix)
    print(f"Text: {result_text}")
    print(f"SHA-512 Hash: {result_hash}")
    

    In this script:

    • The find_hash_with_leading_zeros function generates a hash for a string consisting of a prefix and a nonce.
    • It iterates through nonces (starting from 0) until it finds a hash with the specified number of leading zeros.
    • Adjust the prefix variable to a string of your choice.

    This process can take a long time because it requires computing many hashes until the condition is met.

    Would you like to run this script, or do you need further assistance with something specific?





  • Game theory is a tough subject, but it would be worth it for you to study to understand how you are acting against your less preferred candidate and helping what should be your least preferred candidate (assuming your ranked choice has the republican nominee below the democratic nominee).

    Keep voting for 99% … gets us to the same place

    You make it seem as though your protest vote does not also get us to the same place? Many voters have shared your mentality and voted accordingly for the past 200+ years and it’s not made a difference, what makes you think this time things will change?







  • The author did a poor job of explaining that. He’s referencing the thought experiment of a businessman instructing a super effective AI to make paperclips. Given a terse enough objective and an effective enough AI, one can imagine a scenario in which the businessman and the whole world in fact are turned into paperclips. This is obviously not the businessman’s goal, but it was the instruction he gave the AI. The implication of the thought experiment is that AI needs guardrails, perhaps even ethics, or else it can unintentionally result in a doomsday scenario.



  • The dispute at this point is over how we define a country, especially because Taiwan clearly falls in a grey area within that definition. I claim that they are fundamentally unable to exercise their sovereignty given they aren’t formally recognized as a country by even their greatest allies and benefactors, thus they fail. You claim that they can fulfill the roles of the state, have a national identity, and have various semantic work-arounds for that fundamental illegitimacy, thus they pass.

    I am willing to agree with you (albeit with some rephrasing there) if you were at least consistent. So, do you consider Palestine to be sovereign or not. I consider them sovereign. I am consistent. For you to be consistent in your views would require you to view Palestine to lack sovereignty. Mind you China recognizes Palestine as sovereign. If you say yes they have sovereignty then it demonstrates you’re just trying to bring politics into semantics which in truth is what’s going on in this whole thread. A political faction is attempting to coop the language to suit their narrative whether it requires logical consistency or not.


  • I commend you for recognizing to dispute the sovereignty of Taiwan it helps to start with a definition. Unfortunately for you the definition you provided is vague and at ends with more formal definitions. I’ll reference you to the indisputable democratic source of knowledge wikipedia (feel free to edit the page if you it can be improved):

    Sovereignty can generally be defined as supreme authority.[1] Sovereignty entails hierarchy within the state, as well as external autonomy for states.[2] In any state, sovereignty is assigned to the person, body or institution that has the ultimate authority over other people in order to establish a law or change existing laws.

    The PRC and the USA do not pass and enforce laws in Taiwan. The Taiwan government, elected by the people of Taiwan does. They are self sovereign.

    You’ve brought a lot of good points which I ought to go through in detail, but briefly: Vietnam great analysis but different country. Military - is Japan sovereign based on reliance on US? Are there only a handful of actually sovereign states (the superpowes) in your schema? Regarding not provoking PRC no shit they don’t want to get slaughtered. As has been pointed out they have organizations and relationships that are de facto diplomatic if they are not called that because of the gun to their head.

    Curious, what’s your stance on Palestine’s sovereignty? I think they can be considered sovereign, I don’t see that spectre of other powers potential influence as taking that away. I don’t see why all you guys need to make the bar seem so high, if you individualize it this much the word changes its meaning. A nation doesn’t need to be uncontested among all other nations to be sovereign. If its not the Taiwan government who is sovereign there? Your position would require there be an “unsovereign” condition, unless you actually believe its the PRC sovereign there. Unless its contested within the borders I don’t see how you could make the argument a nation is unsoverneign.


  • How do you go from there - economic dependence and decreasing recognition - to not being self sovereign? They run a government and have elections. As another hexbear pointed out

    true enough a lot of that works out to semantics, such as their having “Economic, Trade, and Cultural Offices” instead of formal embassies despite them doing largely the same thing

    This is without contending your points about their economic situation and degree to which the mainland coerces the language of the relationship held between Taiwan and other nations.