Comments by "Mat Broomfield" (@matbroomfield) on "Sabine Hossenfelder" channel.

  1. It's not that hard science doesn't matter, but who's going to fund it?
    54
  2. youtube's content moderation is run by 90 year old Karen-bots nowadays. It's unbearable.
    33
  3. 21 years? Are you sure Elon?
    23
  4. We need to change our social contract to deal with blatantly corrupt politicians, and murderous corporations, and Elon Musk.
    16
  5. We're living in horrific times with the rapid side-lining of human beings in every field of human endeavour. This breathless race to hand over control to computers is a reckless as it despicable, and it's ALL in service of money.
    10
  6. "No one wants to control fish or birds" Tell that to your dinner.
    7
  7. Dry humor at its finest.
    6
  8. I couldn't disagree more with our assessment Sabine. AI is being used to remove human decision making, like automation was used to replace manual labour in every situation it could be used (with robots picking up the slack nowadays.).
    5
  9. 😆
    5
  10. First off, Musk is a absolute and habitual liar, so playing 5 minutes of him opening his sleazy mouth utterly shoots any further points you might want to make in the foot. But even without him, you're operating on a false premise; that science SHOULD continue to increase exponentially. The curve of human discoveries has been vertical since the start of the industrial age, but like Moore's law or the myth of infinite growth in share prices, that was CLEARLY unsustainable. You can research it all you like, but there's always going to be a maximum capacity for data, or a maximum speed for communication, or a fastest travel speed, or a maximum fuel economy, and the closer you edge towards it the greater the law of diminishing returns imposes itself. The fact is, for the vast majority of endeavours, close enough is good enough. Sabine, I'm increasingly becoming suspicious of your motivations nowadays.
    4
  11. The scale of your charts is critical. If they show one trilllionth of a percentage point, then I'm not bothered.
    4
  12. Finally, some sanity on the matter.
    3
  13. Things like this make physics look ridiculous.
    3
  14. 😆
    3
  15. The only way that Moore's law applies is the doubling of nvidia's profits as they price gouge and blame it on the hunger of AI systems for hardware. Huang is not remotely interested in reducing costs.
    3
  16. So the global warming is creating global cooling? It's almost like nobody has a goddamned clue, and Sabine's job is simply to sow constant mistrust in science.
    3
  17. Uhhh, surely even the fuels that comes from the breakdown of plants and animals don't come from FOSSILS. Fossils are the permineralised corpses of dead creatures. Rotting and conversion under pressure is not fossilisation.
    2
  18. Hoping for a Terminator to come for Altman and Musk.
    2
  19. "quantum" "nano" and "AI" are the phrases de jour to fool the credulous.
    2
  20.  @Duke_Romilar_III  Absolutely.
    2
  21. some humans, not MAGA voters.
    2
  22. They might as well limit computers. That pandora's cat is already long out of the box.
    2
  23. God dark matter did it.
    2
  24. Hmmm, interesting video as usual. If it exists.
    2
  25. Can there POSSIBLY be any need to calculate it beyond a few thousand digits, if that? And it has an intangible value that can never be fully enumerated.
    2
  26.  @Wordzwurth  Yes, I think I can agree with that statement.
    2
  27.  @1pcfred  Lol!
    2
  28.  @interstellarsurfer  It's nothing to do with feelings. It's about intelligibility.
    2
  29. Musk is a habitual liar who should never be trusted on anything except his own greed and stupidity. Dawkins longgg ago lost any credibility as a worthwhile commentator.
    2
  30.  @you-dont-know-me  I wish you luck. In the past, non-profitable endeavours such as musicians, had royal patrons. the problem is, science can cost millions or even billions. It's the harsh reality of existence that people simply cannot afford that sort of money for no return, and even if they could, that would make it a haven for scammers.
    2
  31.  @defeqel6537  I understood the video. I am sceptical as I am of everything from Sabine.
    2
  32. Ouch. Well that was a backhanded pimp slap.
    1
  33. I saw a Facebook article today about an apparent dinosaur on a 1000 year old building frieze. 95% of the comments were saying that humans lived with dinosaurs, or there used to be giant humans, or some supernatural nonsense. And these were people from supposedly the best educated nations on Earth! I don't trust my fellow humans with facts. I don't even trust them to think rationally.
    1
  34. I don't even fly regular class. I'm not paying all that money to be treated like crap.
    1
  35. This is why you don't elect rich old c.s with nothing to lose to lead your country.
    1
  36. How is this anything other than a progression of multi-layer bluray writers? They were already waaaay too slow for backup purposes.
    1
  37. It's almost as though the whole thing is BS.
    1
  38. When the human is trying really hard to not seem human, the test seems a bit unfair. TBH, I'm not sure most Trump supporters would pass human either...
    1
  39. How is this any different to the way a child learns? 90% of humans could not have answered your maths question either - does that mean we're incapable of reason? Until you can clear define what reason even is, your entire question is meaningless. I am 100% positive that computers will learn to reason and infinitely better than humans because they both learn in a similar way, by ingest external information and creating relationships.
    1
  40.  @rayparent1  A new born baby has no independent way to sample reality, but it always seems to manage. AI has the entirety of the internet to help it sample reality, and that's no less real that when we look at the sea bed through a remote camera, or a distant star through a telescope.
    1
  41. You're completely wrong Sabine. You can only control what you say, not how others interpret it, and lazy agenda-motivated journalists will simply cherry pick no matter what. Your job is to present the facts, not hand hold children through understanding them or presenting them accurately.
    1
  42. Meanwhile, the Godfather of AI predicts it will take over the world https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxkBE23zDmQ
    1
  43.  @NJ-wb1cz  IN fairness, I was not disputing what you wrote. I was responding to the OP.
    1
  44.  @OOL-UV2  Soros is not on my radar, and I haven't seen him acting so publicly to be evil, but if you say so.
    1
  45. The main good thing about AI deepfakes, is to make us all suspicious of the media fakery that has been going on for decades.
    1
  46. You've spent the last year teaching us not to trust science at all, but now you want to use science to discuss a new theory?
    1
  47.  @Thomas-gk42  Quantum physics so no...
    1
  48. "Given all we currently know about the universe..." And that is the end of the proposition.
    1
  49. Research proposal - Computer says "Naaah." It's bad enough that AI is deciding what words we can say on youtube without these shitty systems being used to giv ethe thumbs down to people's life's work. I would remind you that a lot of modern technologies arose coincidentally, as a result of work by NASA. Imagine if AI had done a cost benefit or significance analysis of the space program?
    1
  50. They've learned not to predict things that can be tested while they are still alive - exactly like Christians.
    1
  51.  @miriamweller812  🤣Did I say "Republicans?" Learn to read before trying to be a wise ass. And if you think that the party who used the Southern strategy to foment racial division as an election strategy for 50 years, and has cheated its way to the election for the past 30, is the same as the party that gave people affordable health care, tried to cancel student loan debt, fights for the environment, and took covid seriously, is the same as the party that tried to undo all of those things, whilst screaming Drill baby drill, maybe you should go sit at the children's table.
    1
  52. "We're just too boring" Oy, speak for yourself. I think I'm pretty fascinating! 😁
    1
  53. I think you're an agent of chaos Sabine, and I think you enjoy that reputation in spite of what you say. The question I have never been able to answer, is whether you are chaotic good, or chaotic evil. Do you just want to tear everything down, or build things better? You'd have to do more building before I would believe the latter.
    1
  54. I had a comment on Facebook censored by them this morning, along with a posting ban. This month, I have had a comment removed from youtube with a warning of account closure. Neither were directed at individuals present or represented, nor did they include profanity. I've given up commenting on MSN entirely because it's so censorious. You can't even use the exact words used in the news reports you're trying to comment upon. I would LOVE to speak my mind, but AI bots are SO damned hypersensitive that you can't have an adult conversation, much less one with the occasional grown up word. I despise it. It's like having an 80 year old Amish grandmother standing at your shoulder the whole time.
    1
  55. What total nonsense. More "everything you know is a lie," reality undermining BS. For starters, there are plenty of absolute values; the square root of 9, the number of whole digits from 0-100, the temperature of absolute zero, the speed of light. But even if there were not, our universe, nor our interaction with it, requires absolute precision. Whether an electrical circuit measures 220 volts or 219.9999999999 is irrelevant for daily operation, and when it IS important, we simply measure to enough decimal places to deal with that. Approximations are good enough. As you said about about never truly knowing about black holes, how would this information change a single thing we do?
    1
  56. The holographic principle sounds like arrant nonsense. What would be the motivation and means of transmitting information to the surface, let alone compressing it?
    1
  57. Our government is no stranger to pissing away billions of pounds of our money on projects that do us no good. Useless PPP, weapons for nations that did not want to know us until they got attacked, tax giveaways to mega corporations, and soooo much money on immigrants, many of them illegal. This is what happens when both parties see tax money as theirs to play with.
    1
  58. "There's a huge black hole at the centre of the Milky Way: its name is Sag A*" SAg A* "That's not my name, my mum named me Derek!"
    1
  59. I hope so.
    1
  60.  @Jbenneballe  🤣🤡
    1
  61. Greed, sh**posting, and political manipulation will be the driving forces. Future generations are in for a REALLY bad time.
    1
  62. The unmitigated arrogance of saying "We don't understand it so it must not be understandable." It's one step away from throwing up his hands and saying "God did it."
    1
  63.  @malcolmberke4862  🤣
    1
  64. I don't mind that scientists get things wrong, but I resent the fact that they act as though their observations are are unchanging facts. This is partly a media problem, partly a need for dramatic headlines to get funding, but partly an arrogance problem.
    1
  65. 😉
    1
  66. A million experts can disbelieve something, but it counts for nothing if their expertise is not in the appropriate subject.
    1
  67. How would the growth of black holes violate energy conservation? Of COURSE they grow, as more matter falls into them. Frankly, I've come to have growing suspicion for science, and especially cosmology over the past 5 years, and no, Professor Dave, it's not because of Sabine's anti-science bias; it's because science keeps making preposterous claims and then having to retract them, or simply changing its mind. Scientists have to discover or create stuff to keep getting paid. Anyone see a potential conflict there?
    1
  68. Moronic navel gazing. Don't they have anything valuable to use their huge budgets and time on?
    1
  69. "China champions free trade" Oh that has to be the most hilarious position ever. Their idea of free trade is "We flood your markets using child labour subsidised products, but you cannot even sell to ours without a CCP partner. Oh, and your patents are meaningless is China."
    1
  70. Don't tell me "God did?!" 🤣🤣🤣
    1
  71. I live 30 miles from London, in one of the bigger towns in Essex, and I don't have fibre optic internet either despite living half a mile from the exchange. 30mb/s copper that dies when it rains.
    1
  72. It's high time the entire started treat Musk with the contempt, distrust, and disgust that he deserves. He's evil to the core.
    1
  73. Don't expect to easily change people's minds when their income and reputation depends upon the wrong answer.
    1
  74. Not for all the tea in China. I'd go vegetarian in an instant if they were the only choices.
    1
  75. Fluctuations? Sclew you Germans too! ;-) - Chang Wei
    1
  76. Who is offering that hypothesis - Ken Ham?
    1
  77. Failing some systemic factor that could affect all QBITs the same way at the same time, (and assuming I am not missing some design element that makes this behave differently to logic), of COURSE, the more error checking bits that are added, the less errors, the greater the cost, and the slower the system. There is a natural homogenising effect in duplication that leads to greater accuracy. One QBIT may be wrong, but the likelihood of two being wrong in the same way is reduced, and that likelihood reduces still further the more QBITs you add. What am I missing?
    1
  78.  @axle.student  But qubits ARE binary sooooo...
    1
  79.  @axle.student  I don't find you in the least bit offensive because we are simply having a friendly discussion. However, regardless of how you find things, computer scientists describe Qubits as binary. But EVEN if they were not, the purpose of an analogue measuring system would be to measure values within a range. Say 0-25%. Thus, measurements of error checking replicated Qubits should either confirm or contradict that value. The more parallel measurements you take, the more likely you are to achieve accuracy. If quantum uncertainty meant every value was so wildly unpredictable that error checking was meaningless, then the system would be useless.
    1
  80.  @axle.student  NO machine is perfect. External factors can affect consistency. Conventional computers are unquestionably binary, yet every system includes error checking. Why do you think that is?
    1
  81.  @axle.student  So computers convert analogue signals into binary, and despite creating many errors, manage to use error checking to eliminate those errors. Just like Qubits. End of story.
    1
  82.  @axle.student  You misunderstand my position entirely. I was commenting on the SINGLE ISSUE about Qubit error checking. I do NOT think that quantum computing is a panacea to all of society's computing needs for a dozen different reasons. As you mentioned, cost is one; the type of tasks they are good for being another, space, build complexity, the need for super cooling, power usage, and more. Quantum computing joins the "Yeah, sure" bin alongside cold fusion reactors, full self driving cars, Mars colonisation, ethical billionaires and meeting aliens in our lifetime. Anyway, I think that we have arrived at a broadly similar position so I'll wish you a happy life, give a nod of respect for your earlier computing analysis, and leave it there.
    1
  83.  @Wordzwurth  digitally
    1
  84.  @Wordzwurth  That makes absolutely no sense. A circle begins at whatever point you say it does. The reason it doesn't have precise digital value, is because it is an eternal sequence.
    1
  85.  @Wordzwurth  Maths/geometry operates in at least two spheres; the physical world, and the abstract intellectual world (if that's the best term?). The abstract world has no problem with resolution. You say "start at 0 degrees" and that's an absolute, precise location. Yet even starting with that unquestionably precise, perfect location, pi never resolves. That's not a measuring problem - that is the nature of pi.
    1
  86. Surely, developing more accurate models of the universe is critically important?
    1
  87.  @interstellarsurfer  As though you understand quantum physics! 🤡
    1
  88. @ 🤣🤣🤣
    1
  89. What on earth are you talking about? Students pay for their OWN education. Tax payers paid NOTHING for this - quite the opposite; she accrued decades of debt for this degree. This degree will have cost her between 27 and 67 thousand pounds. By all means complain about the value - and I will complain about the value of a theoretical physicist wasting her education making youtube videos that attack the very system, that, according to her, German tax payers paid for, pandering to an anti-science audience, rather than adding to the body of knowledge in her chosen subject. I get that you are bitter about the way you were treated but dishonestly crapping on academia at every opportunity makes you look more like a spurned lover than an intelligent commentator. You know NOTHING about the value of her degree. So disappointed by the downwards trajectory of this channel.
    1
  90. In EVERY sport, there are tiers and biological unfairnesses. I wanted to play basketball well and apart from my lack of skill, I just couldn't compete with teams who were a foot taller than me. Surely basketball should be divided by height, and age, and speed, and skill?
    1
  91. Given the recent "infinite monkeys" revelation, that suggests, as I have always argued, that even in an infinite universe, there need not be perfect copies of each of us, because the odds are longer than the age of the universe.
    1
  92.  @rayparent1  No I haven't. I may have expressed it poorly though.
    1
  93. Absolute meaningless technobable word salad. And you're utterly wrong. There's no "artistic" interpretation - maths is absolute, even if we don't always fully understand it.
    1
  94.  @padmabushan  " any such large claims in theoretical physics should be backed by an experimental result before such massive investment of time is made in it." Just as well nobody followed that logic when searching for the Higgs Boson. Or black holes. Or strange matter. Or a million other things that were only theoretical until we built the tools to search for them.
    1
  95. They've obviously been taking marketing advice from the solar roadways people.
    1