You can have firefox+ublock on Android. Idk about iOS though. Since apple is a monopoly and a bitch with browsers.

Point, purpose, whatever. They are synonyms.

Look, you said you didn’t understand insurance. I tried to explain to you that the reason you don’t understand insurance is because you are wrong about your definition of insurance. If you fixed how you define “insurance” to make sense with how the rest of the world uses it, then you would have a much easier time understanding insurance.

But you refuse to change your definition of insurance. That to me signals that you’re not trying to learn, you just want to argue.

If that’s the case. Fine, let’s argue. But it is hard to argue about something if each of us have a different definition of what that something is.

Yes, you could see insurance as a bet. When giving insurance, you are betting that the insurer will be lucky. But since you have to make a profit, you have to obtain more than the expected value. It is not much different than a casino.

If you bet on a coin toss at a casino and win, you wouldn’t get 2x your offer, you might only get 1.9x. That 0.1x is the casino’s profit.

If your house has a 50% chance to lose all value in the next year, your insurance payment must be higher than 50% of your houses value. If it is 55%, then that 5% is the insurance companies’ profit margin.

If there is no data because nobody has ever been insured, then you just make an educated guess with a low confidence score.

So the last example has a high confidence that it’s a 50% chance results in 55%. Let’s say you eeucately guess that the chance is 20-80%. The middle point of your guess is still 50%, but due to the low confidence, your margin would need to be higher. In this case, they payment might be 70% instead of 55%.

Now you see why insurance companies need all that data. Higher confidence means lower prices without risk increase, or the same prices with a lower risk. Lower prices allow more market share, which results in more money.

If it were as you said, why would they even need to make predictions? Just adjust the rate according to the pool size. “Oh no, last month was really unlucky and the money pool shrank, we’ll increase prices this month”, “nice! Last month was lucky and the pool increased, we can lower the price”.

As I said, there are many ways to implement insurance.

Again. You are confusing purpose with implementation.

The purpose is what I stated. The implementation is irrelevant. You claim that insurance is insurance only if it is implemented the way you explain. However, as I tried to explain, you can provide insurance without having a large pool of insurers.

Look at this example:

Alice has a tomato farm and wants to buy a goat from Bob. They reach a price of 20 tomatoes for a goat.

However, they live in different villages. Alice pays 2 tomatoes to Charlie to pay for transport. But Alice is worried that bandits will steal the tomatoes or goat from charlie while the transportation is happening.

So Charlie offers Alice this deal: “give me 4 tomatoes instead of 2, and you will receive a goat, even if the goods get stolen in transport”.

That is insurance.

Why can Charlie offer such a thing? That’s just the implementation, it doesn’t matter. But here are a few possibilities:

• Charlie calculated the chances of getting robbed, and calculated that after many insured transports, the value of the insurance payment will be greater than the value of the insured goods.
• Charlie is very confident in himself and has never been robbed. He accepts the risks, and if he does get robbed, he’ll make sacrifices to get another goat.
• Charlie paid a cheaper insurance, easy low-risk profit.
• Charlie has plenty of goats, and is willing to lose one of them to strengthen his ties with Alice.
• Charlie does plenty of safe transports with a higher-than-normal insurance price, so even if he is robbed this time, he has enough of apples stored to pay for another goat. (This is the one you are saying)

About your last claim:

Nobody “knows” how much insurance is worth. Insurance companies pay lots of money to obtain data and make calculations about predictions. But it’s all statistics. The more data there is, the more accurate the price can be. Companies that make good predictions stay afloat, while bad predictions makes them lose money.

But that goes for absolutely every product. There is no global entity that dictates the prices of products as an absolute fact.

You cannot have an insurance company with a single regular customer the same way you cannot have an iphone shop with a single regular customer.

But the concept of insurance is not only for insurance companies.

You can sell a single instance of insurance to a single customer like you can sell a single instance of an iphone to a single customer.

You can see at what price others are selling similar insurance policies and set your price like that. Or you can set the price with a big benefit margin to compensate for the higher risk you are incurring when selling insurance while having little data.

No. Pooling the resources of all to spend it on the benefit of society (including helping the less-fortunate) is the purpose of taxes.

The purpose of insurance is to trade low chance big impact risks for 100% chance small costs.

As I said, you can have insurance with just one insurer and one insuree. You cannot have taxes with 1 taxpayer and 1 tax collector, that would be called an asset manager or something, where you pay someone to decide for you what to spend that money on.

Merriam-Webster:

1 a : coverage by contract whereby one party undertakes to indemnify or guarantee another against loss by a specified contingency or peril b : the business of insuring persons or property c : the sum for which something is insured 2 : a means of guaranteeing protection or safety The contract is your insurance against price changes. Frequent hand washing is good insurance against the common cold. 3 gambling : a side bet that a player in blackjack may place when the dealer’s first faceup card is an ace

Note: An insurance bet can be up to half of a player’s original bet. It wins at 2 to 1 odds if the dealer’s cards add up to 21.

First of all, I’m going to replace AI with LLM, since that’s probably what you meant.

There are 2 distinct questions asked in this post:

1. Why not use LLMs to provide different levels of automation? (Like, manual, medium, auto)

Answer: you don’t need LLMs for that. You can just code it in like any other feature. It’s not particularly hard, game developers know how to do it since they are used to programming automation for NPCs.

2. Why not use LLMs to procedurally generate NPC dialogue?

Answer: games are primarily a form of art. NPC dialogues are written with a purpose. Different characters have different personalities. Some dialogues are meant to drive the plot. Other dialogues are meant to teach the player how to play. Others are meant to show the player things that they may have missed, or things that are interesting.

Procedural dialogues removes all the control from artists. They would all be generic npc n#473, with the “personality” of the LLM, maybe slightly varied if the developer writes a different prompt for each character.

Procedural dialogues would have the same issues as procedural world generation or photorealistic graphics, it would just not be interesting.

There is a practically infinite amount of Minecraft worlds, yet they all feel the same way. The thing that differentiates a Minecraft world from another is that which the player has built. The only part of the world that wasn’t procedurally generated.

There is a great amount of photorealistic games. And they all look very similar. You may only distinguish one from another by looking at their handcrafted worlds or their handcrafted characters. But not by staring at a wall. You can stare at a wall in non-photoreslistic games and know what game it is.

So if you put procedurally generated dialogues, no one will read them, since you’ll be bored by the time you read the same thing being said by 5 different NPCs from 5 different games.

That’s because you misunderstand the purpose of insurance.

The purpose of insurance is to provide stability.

That is, instead of paying a lot of money with a low frequency, you pay a small amount of money with high frequency.

Of course, as the provider of that “stability service”, you pay the insurance company.

Note that at no point in this definition is more than one customer necessary.

Each customer has a different definition for “a lot of money” (X), “small amount of money” (Y), “high frequency” (Z). “Low frequency” is usually a month or a year though.

Customers “control” variables X and Z. Insurance companies control Y. For simplicity let’s say A = X*Z.

In an ideal market, each customer would accept the policy where Y is highest.

In your view, insurance policies should have constant Y.

If you make an insurance company based on that, you have 2 options:

1. Set a low Y, you’ll go bankrupt.
2. Set a high Y, you’ll go bankrupt.

In scenario 1. You’ll go bankrupt because your customers will be the ones with the highest A in the market. Since low A customers will go to another company that sets Y as a function of A.

In scenario 2. You’ll go bankrupt because you’ll have no customers. Setting a Y high enough so scenario 1. Doesn’t happen means that not even the highest A will be willing to pay your high Y.

If you see it from the PoV of the customer:

Why would I pay the same as my neighbour that drives drunk every day when I only use my car once a years on a small trip while following every traffic law and regulation? I’ll just go to that other insurance company that costs only a small fraction of my neighbour’s.

Because the British empire was absolutely huge. Which lead to many countries having English as an official language. Which means those countries would conduct trade in English. Followed by American dominance, which also has English as its main language.

And that American dominance includes dominance in media, especially films because of hollywood. Technical documents, research and especially computer-related technical documents are mainly in English for the same reason.

Sure, English is not that hard of a language. But it’s not the easiest either.

It didn’t make me repeat the curriculum. The curriculum is the same for everyone.

I didn’t use basque outside school, but I barely used English. Inside school, it was ~7 hours every day of basque. And ~3h per week of english.

Not research, personal experience:

Even after many years of school/high-school in basque, I learnt it at a way slower rate than English, which was just 1 subject.

I didn’t speak neither basque nor English outside school. At most, the difference might be that I consumed a little bit of media in English while none in basque. But all subjects except spanish and English were in basque, so that should make up for the difference.

And I don’t think it’s just a me thing. Since the curriculum has mostly been the same for all those years of school:

Learn how to say a verb.

That’s it. Many years of school just to say verbs correctly.

The exams where mostly just fill in the blank exercises, where the blank was a verb.

I still don’t know how to say verbs that aren’t the simplest ones.

So to your question I’d say yes. Even though neither are my native tongue, I learnt both since I entered school, but learned them at wildly different rates.

They didn’t when 8GB was the norm. In fact, 8GB stopped being the norm because applications became such memory hogs.

From a non-technical user’s pov kinda true.

But not true at all when you enumerate the actual responsibilities of an OS.

The terminal

Not really. Today at work that error appeared to me. As a software developer of course I have access to terminal, I use it every day.

I just closed the message and opened the terminal again, and it worked.

This is Microsoft’s fault, not any other’s.

RAE is by definition the ultimate authority on the Spanish language in Spain though.

The thing is to have a program randomly select the words for you. That way the words are not related between them, and you aren’t limited by only the words you know.

It’s pronounced the same as a regular u. It is the same letter.

They are weird rules, but in Spanish we have these rule:

If a word has a “Q”, the next letter must always be a silent u. That is, you write a “U” but don’t pronounce it. And after that “U”, always comes a vowel.

Similarly, if after a “G” comes a “E” or “I”, it is pronounced differently depending on if there is a silent “U” after the “G”.

However, sometimes we want a non silent U after a Q or a G. In that case, we write “ü”.

So u and ü are literally the same letter in spanish. We call the 2 dots “diéresis”, maybe it’s similar in German.

Dictionary attacks usually contain a dictionary of common passwords. To use a dictionary for this, you’d have to use a word dictionary instead of a password one. And then you’re back to combinatorics.

4 words, where each word is in the dictionary: N^4. However the N here is way bigger than the amount of ASCII characters. Especially if each of the words may be of a different language. If N is larger than 16384, then it has more combinations than a random 8 ASCII character password. 16384 = sqrt(sqrt(128^8)). Quick Google search says English has more than 1 million words.

Therefore even if you know that the user generated their password using this method and used a dictionary attack tailored for this method, it would still be harder to break than a random 8character password.

Don’t worry, it’s just a meme. I’m choosing to die on this stupid hill for the sake of it.

While I’m at it, in Spanish we don’t have äö, but we do have ü, and in our case, it is literally just a ü with 2 dots, not a different letter. Same thing for áéíóú.

RAE about ñ:

1. Decimoquinta letra del abecedario español. Su nombre es femenino: la eñe (pl. eñes). Representa el fonema consonántico nasal palatal /ñ/.

2. Esta letra nació de la necesidad de representar un nuevo fonema, inexistente en latín. En cada una de las lenguas romances se fue fijando una grafía distinta para representarlo, como gn en italiano y francés, ny en catalán o nh en portugués. El castellano medieval escogió el dígrafo nn, que se solía representar abreviadamente mediante una sola n con una rayita más o menos ondulada encima; así surgió la ñ, adoptada también por el gallego y el vasco. Esa rayita ondulada se llama tilde, nombre dado también al acento gráfico (→ tilde1)

EDIT: it is true that Spanish is not the only language so it shouldn’t be the one to decide if it is a letter or not. Since I only know 2 languages that used it, I checked the other one: basque.

According to euskaltzaindia:

ñ letra (eñe) ñ letra (eñe)

Zenbait jendek uste du [ñ] hots bustia <in> bikotearen ondorio dela beti, eta ñ letrarik ez dela euskaraz. Ez da hala. Erreparatu adibide hauei: ñabardura, ñaka, ñañan egin, ñaño, ñimiño… hitzei; -ño atzizkiaz eraturikoei: andereño, haurño, xoriño, gazteño, maiteño…; mailegatuei: piñoi, txanpiñoi, erresiñol, giñol…; zenbait herri-izeni: Abadiño (abadiñar), Oñati (oñatiar), Armiñon (armiñondar), Iruñea, Urdiñarbe (urdiñarbetar)…; zenbait ponte-izeni: Eñaut, Beñat, Iñaki, Garbiñe, Eguzkiñe, Zuriñe… [EH; 17. araua] (→ letra; → kontsonante busti-palatalen grafia eta ahoskera)

Text: use an accented letter

Image: shows a different, unique letter.

As a Spaniard I feel this is rage bait. Like calling Q an accented O.