I've implemented something similar to this using Golang Channels during Covid lockdowns. You don't get an emergence of intelligence from throwing random spaghetti at a wall.
I have a perfectly functional iPad 5 that no longer receives software updates. It'd be cool if Apple would at least give it security updates, or allow alternative browser engines that don't have this vulnerability. If my iPad gets pwned, my day is going to suck.
iPadOS 16 was at least updated 3 months ago (August) so there's a chance you could still get a security update if it's applicable to that version. iPadOS 15 was updated in July.
That wasn't an actual security update; that only fixed a broken toggle switch for "Advanced Data Protection" in Settings. I'm talking about patches for vulnerabilities.
iPadOS 15 hasn't been receiving the security updates for vulnerabilities that have been released for iPadOS 18.
It's probably because the first bit isn't really true (iPads have a longer supported life than many Android tablets, for example I updated my 2018 iPad Pro with the most recent iPadOS 18.1.1 including this security fix earlier today). And given that the silly joke falls flat.
The iPad 5 in question from the OP supports iPadOS 16 and that last got a security update in August of this year. So if it hasn't got an update today then possibly the vulnerability was only introduced in iOS / iPadOS 17.
System 1 and 2 is a myth. There is only memory and computation. For a complex problem, retrieving from memory is fast, and performing computation is slow. Furthermore, when performing computation, there are different heuristics that you can use to think about a problem, e.g. If you want to predict the orbit of a satellite, you can use Kepler's laws which gives you the full sweeping elliptical motion. Alternatively, you can use Newtons laws for which you need to calculate each time step. Alternatively, you can calculate all the quantum interactions between the satellite, earth, and sun (are we going to call this System 3 because it is more rigorous and is "closer to metal"?).
I don't get how you can conclude it is a myth. These are observations on how people think. What is the myth part. I can clearly observe myself doing fast intuitive decisions which I might even not know the logical reasoning behind, but also I can solve problems by thinking through them using my internal monologue. Are these myths?
The error lies in thinking they're 'real' systems to be taken for granted and blindly reasoned forward from, instead of sometimes-helpful academic categorizations.
You can always factor things into groups. e.g. 'Thoughts about now vs thoughts about the future'. Extending that to say there are therefore two modes of thinking and that the brain must handle your two groups differently, at some fundamental or physiological level, and there are only these two modes and all things are either one or the other ... is perhaps quite misguided without more support.
I don't think we have conclusive evidence, but everything that I see from myself it makes sense to categorize like that. It is either a quick intuitive guess or feel or alternatively I have to hash it out. It just fits perfectly to me.
I do think they are systems in a sense that one is optimsed to be a quick system and the other one requires time, but can solve tougher problems, create something new.
It seems fundamental to me that it is how things would get organized.
...this way, the output of the 3 hashes don't affect each other during the set and membership-check. I wonder how that would affect how much more data you can store. I'm sure someone has considered this.
Agreed. It's like dining out versus having a healthy home cooked meal. Restaurants will sell you delicious food loaded with sodium, sugar, and fat because they want you to crave their food. Likewise, when you outsource your family values, entertainment, news to social media, you meet a similar problem.
Relatedly, beware of the hidden ads in social media. It takes much less money to astroturf a community like reddit than to advertise through conventional means (e.g. commercials, product placements, banner ads). You may be aware of ads on youtube, but you may not be aware of the ads in the comment section. I've seen youtube comments as follows:
Ed: Christ! My stock portfolio has gone down so much since the pandemic... it hurts.
Bob: Mine did too, however in the past year I've been able to recover financially.
Ed: Really? Please help me, how did you recover your losses?
Bob: I'd hate to share my secret, but Jonathon Harris provided me with amazing investment tips.
Sal: Mr. Jonathon Harris helped 10X our portfolio! You can reach him at jonharris@gmail.com
</ad scam>
That was my re-enactment of their discussion. Sure, that was an example of an obvious ad. But think of all the times you read a conversation about a product or service and became convinced to try something just based on a conversation between two supposed strangers online? I've never bought anything from a conventional ad, but I've purchased plenty of things after reading what the socials say about a product, and that makes me ashamed of myself. Word of mouth is effective for a reason, but it's insidious online. And that's where they get you. Steel your mind, when online.
What's worse is that people do genuinely advertise products they like, so it's hard to tell if a conversation is astroturfing. I've done the same thing. I see it particularly for video games and software. There's a meme about how Hollow Knight fans advertise it so much that they suggest you play Hollow Knight even if you were asking about a completely different genre.
All dimensions are a factor. Life could exist on different time-scales (e.g. it moves so slow we thought it was inanimate). It could exist on different physical-scales (be so large we don't realize we are a part of it). Or, it could exist on an entirely different plane of existence (on a desolate planet in a shard of silicon that is turing complete and quietly simulating its own recursive universe).
> be so large we don't realize we are a part of it
While these are valid and interesting ideas from science fiction, I personally doubt that there's some fundamental property about human life that we haven't noticed yet, like some fundamental connection to other matter.
Simply because there's no evidence that our primitive understanding about what is life, has fundamentally changed in history. I guess a few thousand years ago people understood that we, plants and animals are alive and rocks are not and we still think the same. (nature religions aside)
So if there was no shift in understanding for such a long time, why should we now realize we are part of something a part from an eco system?
Wouldn't your iPhone still receive spam SMS text messages with Apple Messages? And isn't Apple Messages commonly exploited by NSO Group (Zero-clicks)? Maybe I'm wrong, but this does not appear to be very fort-like.
Yes. I believe people are just saying that they assume unknown-contact SMS is spam and that sort of sounds like Apple's SMS spam filtering isn't very good.
Heh, I recall seeing many posts arguing against benchmarks when all Macs equipped with an M2/8GB/256GB SSD scored much, much lower than the M1/8GB/256GB SSD. People said the synthetic benchmarks were not representative of real world use and you'd never notice the difference. 'Twas a battle of the optimists, pessimists, and realists. In reality, 'twas just Apple cutting costs in their newer product.
Ask me how I know.