I have just been subjected to a Paradox Exception caused by reading that the memory safe Rust language has and can cause undefined behaviour. My spatial location code in the Universe has been marked with a Time-Space::Paradox violation and is awaiting debugging by celestial dev-ops. Luckily I am currently a live process, so my space and memory will not at this time be reclaimed by the Global-Universal Operating System.
> by reading that the memory safe Rust language has and can cause undefined behaviour
Only unsafe blocks can cause undefined behavior. The memory safe portion of Rust that most program in cannot cause UB. If you use "forbid unsafe" then you can be assured your program is free from UB (assuming all the crates and stdlib you use are as well).
It still leaves me lingering in a space-time-continuum where I search for the safety of rational completeness, while inadvertently living on a Möbious strip.
How did you reach the conclusion that the author specifically meant this part of Gregory of Nyssa's religious thinking? It could just as likely be that the author has come to realise that Gregory of Nyssa was correct in his arguments for the Christian Trinity...? I am just wondering. The author's statements are very entertaining, but they do not seem to be articulated as objects for detailed scrutiny...
If one were either the director or a senior leader of a more-or-less covert biolab doing research that is definitely supposed not to be discovered, would you have done your job if you had not established a procedure for medical treatment of sick or infected employees using local and probably covert resources? - And likely including local isolation of infected or potentially infected people? Whether or not people from this supposed type of biolab turns up at public hospitals does not seem to indicate much.
As far as I know you're not missing anything and this is why gain-of-function research was banned in the US for a while. EcoHealth Alliance outsourced it to China in the mid-2010s because of the ban, so technically none of it was happening in the US.
I have heard of the worlds tiniest violin - but the 'universes' tiniest? How can we possibly be assured that your violin really is the tiniest? There may be some civilization, maybe in Alpha Centauri maybe around Betelgeuse, that produces really small violins? We cannot know in this primitive pre-warp time that we live in...
A search reveals an offer on Ebay - search for 'Worlds Smallest Emergency Violin!" ... the URL is too long to paste. But this is an emergency violin. Clearly not a violin made for normal everyday purposes. And it is still only the 'worlds' smallest. It also does not describe for what emergencies this may help.
I am still confused. It seems to me that these violins on offer are small, but that they surely can be made much much smaller....? However, there may be some instrument/sound physics at play that I am not aware of...
Or maybe not that subjective when looked at closer. It may just as well be a saying that the entitled classes use to defend their selfish and less than good behaviour. Beacause the classes of the not-entitled buy this as somehow having reasonable meaning.
The entitled classes have no reason to change rules that are clearly stacked in their favour. But it sounds way better to say the rules cannot be changed. But it is hard to see why this should be self-evidently true.
Are a content analysis of films supposed or expected to be Truth - with a capital T? Can they be? We are in the realm of fictional narrative as to what concerns the films. Granted, all fiction and narrative must have a connection with Reality - i.e. 'the real world' (however that may be defined) - anything else is impossible. However, fiction is a playground where you can play with the concepts that exists in Reality, in ways which we cannot do in Reality itself [note]. So it is by nature 'detached' from (but coupled to) Reality.
As ChatGPT is an AI language model, is it reasonable to assume that what it can and will produce is always a narrative? Even when asked to make a computer program, are ChatGPT producing 'factual code' or a narrative written as code? Albeit, a narrative that can actually be run through a compiler?
If ChatGPT produces narratives, then the question is not whether analysis of science fiction films are True or False, it is a question of how good the narrative is - i.e. its quality ... I think?
And here only humans can judge the quality of the narrative. It is currently impossible for an AI language model to evaluate a narrative (I contend), as its evaluation will itself be a narrative... (this may be where our humans minds are currently being tricked by our own human invention, the 'AI'...)
So in a way, does a film analysis narrative made by an AI language model about a science fiction film not become science fiction in itself? It is the knowledge about the premise of the analysis narrative that becomes important. But then the premise is important everywhere we meet narratives? It this obvious or non-obvious?
My head is slightly spinning here... as it seems to me that the film analysis is in itself a narrative and is visually presented in a format that shows and indicates a narrative...?
[note] This 'playing' with reality may actually feed back into Reality, and often does. Here I do not relate to entire branches of narrative which is intentionally made to make feedback to reality e.g. so called 'news' (at least modern news and journalism) and political influence/propaganda.
