■To thosewho have left the MAGA movement, whatwas your wake-up call?

Also not paying taxesontipsis an incredibly stupid way togo about distributing a taxbenefit. Ifyou want to cut taxes for lower income, do that.Change the income thresholds or the marginal taxrate,don’t justchange taxeson an incomestream thatis mostly correlated with lower incomes.

Serverhere. Iwas saying this the firsttime he announcedit.Wtf would WEget this bonus and nooneelse. MakesZEROsense untilyourealize... hewas buyingyounger votes

Not to mention tippingisout of hand asitis, we shouldn’t be trying to createmore tax incentives forit.

Worse than that.Itlets themtie tax breakextensions to a future, wildly unpopular bill. That’s how “theBig Beautiful Bill”got passed. Noonewasgoing to vote to notextend thelast round of temporary tax cuts for the middle class. They wouldcrow about the other problems in the bill, butthe powers that be weren’tgoing to removeany of the problemelements. They would just labelanyonewho didn’t vote for the billas for a tax increase...........

Permalink |記事への反応(0) | 22:08

ツイートシェア

■Chatgptが答えた異星人の存在可能性とのそのロジック

Please consider the histroy ofhumanity from biologicalperpsecitve and currentknown fact in nearbyuniverse, whichexpo-planet (from theSol systemperspective)ismostlikely to have civlizaedsociety? Pleaseaddpercentagenext toit in the chart

ChatGPT

Reasoned about exoplanetcivilizationlikelihoodを28 秒行う

Evaluatingplanetary prospects

OK, I’mlookingatthe likelihood of a civilizedsocietyon an exoplanet within ourSolar System.I’ll consider biologicalhistory and current space knowledge,aiming to identifythe most promising candidate.

Identifying potential candidates

I'm considering exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1e, which might suggest they are within or observed from ourSolar System.

Assessing potential candidates

I’m evaluating Proxima Centauri b, Barnard'sStar, LHS 1140, and TRAPPIST-1,focusingon their habitablezonesand available data. The Drake equation might help estimate their civilizedsocietylikelihoods.

Identifying promising exoplanets

I’m notingkey exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, which haveEarth-like characteristicsand are in habitablezones. This narrows down the potential candidates for advancedcivilizations.

Assessing habitablezones

I'm gathering infoonplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, consideringfactorslikemagneticfields,atmospheres, and proximity to G-typestars for their potential to support advancedcivilizations.

Evaluating exoplanet prospects

I'm noting that Proxima Centauri b, despitebeing closeand around ared dwarfstar, might supportlife ifithas amagneticfieldand atmosphere. This makes me think aboutits potential.

Charting probabilities

I'm estimatingcivilization probabilities for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e, using speculativepercentagesbasedon the Drake equation and the lack ofevidence for intelligentlife.

Charting speculative odds

I'm crafting a chart with exoplanet names andcivilizationlikelihoodpercentages, grounded in the longtimeline oflife'sevolution, despite the speculativenature of these figures.

Identifying exoplanet contenders

I’m evaluating exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b, TRAPPIST-1 e, and Kepler-186f, considering theirstar types and distances, to gauge their potential for supporting advancedcivilizations from oursolar system'sviewpoint.

Weighing proximity and observation

I'm leaning towards Proxima Centauri b due toits closeness and observational potential, despite concerns aboutitsflarestar dynamics. TRAPPIST-1 e, f, or g are also worth considering.

Revisiting exoplanet options

I'mfocusingon exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b, Ross 128 b, LHS 1140 b, TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, andK2-18b,aiming to chart theirlikelihood of hosting a civilizedsocietybasedon current knowledge.

Assessing exoplanet potentials

I'm gathering speculative probabilities for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, using the Drake equation and current understanding, to better estimate their chances of hosting a civilizedsociety.

Refining speculative probabilities

I’m refining speculative probabilities for exoplanets, including Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, to estimate their chances of hosting a civilizedsociety, consideringEarth's long biologicalhistory.

Refining odds

I'm considering theastronomicaltimeline for intelligentlifeonEarth,leading me toassign evenlower speculative odds for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e.

Clarifying speculativenature

I’m crafting a simplified chart with arbitrarypercentages, clearly noting the speculativenature and lack of scientific data, while considering the target audience'sbasic understanding of the topic.

Mappingout speculative odds

I’m charting arbitrarypercentages for exoplanets, clarifying their speculativenature, and ensuring the datais accessible foryoung audiences with minimal scientific detail.

Crafting a chart

I’m creating amarkdowntable with speculativepercentages forthe likelihood of civilizedlifeon exoplanets, emphasizing their purely theoreticalnature and considering the understandinglevel of an 8-year-old.

Integrating speculative analysis

I’m mappingout amarkdown chart with speculativepercentages forthe likelihood of a civilizedsocietyon exoplanets, mindful of thecomplexity and simplifying for an 8-year-old's understanding.

Assessinglikelihoods

I’m piecingtogethermarkdown for exoplanets, noting Proxima Centauri b'sreduced civilizedlife chance due to thered dwarf's activity. This inclusionhighlights the speculativenature of the analysis.

Piecingtogether speculative odds

I’m detailing amarkdown chart for audience-friendly exoplanetlikelihoods, considering environmental challengesand adding a disclaimer about the speculativenature and lack ofevidence.

Piecingtogether

I’m leaning towards Proxima Centauri b forits proximity and silentstar, butI’lladd a speculative chart ranking nearby exoplanets, noting their advancedcivilizations' hypotheticallikelihood.

Assessingcivilization probabilities

I'm emphasizing the slow emergence of intelligentlifeonEarth, which suggests that the odds ofany habitableplanet developing acomplexcivilization might beaslowas a fewpercent.

Belowis a very speculative chart that—basedon what we know aboutEarth’s long, windingpath fromsimplelife to a “civilizedsociety” and our limited observations of nearby exoplanets—gives somefun,made‑uppercentage chances for a few of our best candidate exoplanets. Remember: Scientists havenot yetfoundany proof oflife (let alone advancedcivilizations)onany exoplanet. Thesenumbers are just playful estimates to helpyou think about theideas!

Speculative Chances of Finding an AdvancedCivilizationon Nearby Exoplanets

Exoplanet EstimatedLikelihood of a CivilizedSociety

Proxima Centauri b ~2%

TRAPPIST-1 e ~1.5%

TRAPPIST-1 f ~1%

TRAPPIST-1 g ~1%

LHS 1140 b ~0.5%

HowDid We (Very Roughly) Guess TheseNumbers?

Earth’s Example:

OnEarth,life beganassimple single‑celled organisms and took billions of years to evolve into a species that builtcomplex societies. This longjourney suggests that—even if aplanetis in the “habitablezone” (where liquid water could exist)—developing an advanced, civilizedsociety might be rare.

Nearby Exoplanets:

Proxima Centauri b:

Thisis the closest exoplanet to us. Even thoughitsstar (Proxima Centauri)is ared dwarf that sometimes sendsout strongflares (which might harmlife),its closeness makesitone of ourmost interesting candidates. That’swhy we giveit a slightly higher guess (~2%).

TRAPPIST-1 System (e, f, g):

Theseplanets are part of agroup orbiting a verycoolstar. Their environments might be challenging (for example, they could be tidally locked, meaningone sidealwaysfaces thestar), so the chance of acomplex, advancedcivilization might be abitlower.

LHS 1140 b:

Thisplanetis promising in some ways butis alittle fartherawayand around a dimmerstar, so our playful estimateis evenlower.

AFinalNote

All of thesepercentages are extremely rough guessesbasedon whatlittle we understand about the conditions forlife andintelligence. Scientists useideaslike the Drake Equation to think about these chances—but until we have concreteevidence, thesenumbers remain just forfun and imagination.

Enjoy exploring theseideas—and remember, spaceis full of mysteries waiting to be discovered!

あなた:

Please examine the Drake Equationitself and see if this euqationis acculate ormore opition in the equationyouwill use

ChatGPT

Reasoned about the Drake Equationを6 秒行う

re-examining the Drake Equation

evaluating the Drake Equation'svalue

Clarifying the Drake Equation

OK, let me see. The Drake Equationisn't a precise formula;it'smore of a guiding heuristic that tackles numerous uncertainties regarding extraterrestrialcivilizations.

Assessing the Drake Equation

Thinking through the Drake Equation, I’m evaluatingits conceptualnature,its uncertain parameters, andits criticism to concludeonits reliabilityas an accurate predictivemodel.

Understanding the Drake Equation

I’m mappingout the Drake Equationas a conceptual guide, detailingits parameters, which are oftenbasedon estimates or opinions, to evaluateits reliability for predicting extraterrestrialcivilizations.

The Drake Equationis a famous formula thatwas created to help scientists think about the manyfactors involved in estimating thenumber of detectable extraterrestrialcivilizations in ourgalaxy. However, when welookat the equation closely, we see thatitismore of a conceptualframework or heuristictool than a precise, predictive formula.Let’sbreak downwhy:

The Drake Equation

The equationis usually writtenas:

𝑁

=

𝑅

∗

×

𝑓

𝑝

×

𝑛

𝑒

×

𝑓

𝑙

×

𝑓

𝑖

×

𝑓

𝑐

×

𝐿

N=R

∗

×f

p

​

×n

e

​

×f

l

​

×f

i

​

×f

c

​

×L

Where:

𝑅

∗

R

∗

: The averagerate ofstar formationper year in ourgalaxy.

𝑓

𝑝

f

p

​

: The fraction of thosestars that haveplanetary systems.

𝑛

𝑒

n

e

​

: The averagenumber ofplanets that could potentially supportlifeperstar withplanets.

𝑓

𝑙

f

l

​

: The fraction of thoseplanets wherelife actually develops.

𝑓

𝑖

f

i

​

: The fraction ofplanets withlife where intelligentlife evolves.

𝑓

𝑐

f

c

​

: The fraction ofcivilizations that develop technology that releases detectablesignals into space.

𝐿

L: The length oftime suchcivilizations release detectablesignals.

Why the Drake EquationIsMore of a Guideline Than a Precise Formula

Uncertain Inputs:

Well-Known Parameters:

Somefactors,like

𝑅

∗

R

∗

(star formationrate) and

𝑓

𝑝

f

p

​

(fraction ofstars withplanets), have become better known through modernastronomy.

Highly SpeculativeFactors:

The parameters related to the development oflife andintelligence—

𝑓

𝑙

f

l

​

,

𝑓

𝑖

f

i

​

,

𝑓

𝑐

f

c

​

, and

𝐿

L—arebasedon very limited data. For example,Earthis theonlyplanet we know wherelifehas developed, so we have no way to compare or derive a statistically robust estimate for thesefactors. This means that thevalues chosen for these parameters are largely subjective estimates or educated guesses.

Wide Ranges of PossibleValues:

Because many of thesefactors are not well-constrained, ifyouchangeone of themore uncertain parameters even slightly, thefinal estimate for

𝑁

N (thenumber ofcivilizations) can varyby many orders ofmagnitude. This wide range shows that the equation canlead to very differentoutcomesbasedonpersonal or theoreticalassumptions.

Heuristic, Not Predictive:

The Drake Equationwas never meant to provide a preciseanswer. Instead,it servesas a way to organize our thinking about what conditions might be necessary for the development of extraterrestrialcivilizations.It encourages discussion about the relative importance of differentfactors andhighlights where our scientific knowledgeis limited.

Is the Drake Equation Accurate orMore Opinion-Based?

Accurate?

In thesense ofbeing a strict mathematicalmodel with well-defined inputs and predictableoutputs, the Drake Equationis not accurate.Its accuracyis limitedbythe extreme uncertainties in several ofitskey parameters.

Opinion-Based?

Many of the terms in the equation, especially those concerning theevolution oflife andintelligence, arebasedon opinion, interpretation, and the single example ofEarth. Therefore, while thestructure of the equationis logical, thenumbersyou put intoit (and hence thefinal result) are oftenmore reflective of our current opinionsand assumptions than of robust empirical data.

Conclusion

The Drake Equationis a valuabletool for framing the question of extraterrestriallife.It helps scientists and enthusiastsbreak down acomplex problem into smaller,more manageable questions. However, because several ofitsfactors are highly uncertain and subject topersonal interpretation,itismore of a conceptual guide—or even a way to stimulate discussion—than a formula that provides a definitive, accurate prediction of thenumber of extraterrestrialcivilizations.

Insummary, while the Drake Equationis useful for thinking about the variousfactors that mightlead to the emergence of acivilization,itsoutputs should betakenas highly speculative estimates rather than precise measurements.

あなた:

Please also consider the possiblities of non-human intelligent emrgencing from the longhistory ofSol system and nearbyplanets and see if thereisany possiblites that inonetime intelligentlife emerged in nearbyplanets and see this to the equation

ChatGPT

Reasoned about non-humanintelligence and the Drake Equationを19 秒行う

Evaluating non-humanintelligence

I'm thinking about the potential for non-human intelligentlife forms in theSol system and neighboringplanets, and how this mightfactor into the equation.

Piecingtogether possibilities

I'm thinking about how to integrate the emergence of non-human intelligentlife, possiblyonMars orEuropa, into the Drake Equation for theSol system and neighboringplanets.

Reflectingon potential

It's interesting to think about the hypothesis of intelligentlife emergingonMars orVenus, thoughEarth remains theonly knownlife-supportingplanet in thesolar system.

Considering other realms

I'm examining if intelligentlife could have emergedonplanetslikeMars,Venus, orEuropa, and how thispossibility alignswith the predictions of the Drake Equation.

Analyzing parallelevolution

Hmm, I’m thinking about how non-human intelligentlifeonMars orVenus could intersectwith theassumptions of the Drake Equation, which seems tofocussolelyonEarth-basedevolution.

Evaluatinglife exploration

I’m piecingtogether the hypothesis of non-human, advanced, intelligentlife in thesolar system.Mars,Venus, and Titan present challenges, butEuropa and Enceladus might harbor microbiallife.

Adapting the equPermalink |記事への反応(0) | 21:12

ツイートシェア

■Chatgptが答えた異星人の存在可能性とのそのロジック

Please consider the histroy ofhumanity from biologicalperpsecitve and currentknown fact in nearbyuniverse, whichexpo-planet (from theSol systemperspective)ismostlikely to have civlizaedsociety? Pleaseaddpercentagenext toit in the chart

ChatGPT

Reasoned about exoplanetcivilizationlikelihoodを28 秒行う

Evaluatingplanetary prospects

OK, I’mlookingatthe likelihood of a civilizedsocietyon an exoplanet within ourSolar System.I’ll consider biologicalhistory and current space knowledge,aiming to identifythe most promising candidate.

Identifying potential candidates

I'm considering exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1e, which might suggest they are within or observed from ourSolar System.

Assessing potential candidates

I’m evaluating Proxima Centauri b, Barnard'sStar, LHS 1140, and TRAPPIST-1,focusingon their habitablezonesand available data. The Drake equation might help estimate their civilizedsocietylikelihoods.

Identifying promising exoplanets

I’m notingkey exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, which haveEarth-like characteristicsand are in habitablezones. This narrows down the potential candidates for advancedcivilizations.

Assessing habitablezones

I'm gathering infoonplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, consideringfactorslikemagneticfields,atmospheres, and proximity to G-typestars for their potential to support advancedcivilizations.

Evaluating exoplanet prospects

I'm noting that Proxima Centauri b, despitebeing closeand around ared dwarfstar, might supportlife ifithas amagneticfieldand atmosphere. This makes me think aboutits potential.

Charting probabilities

I'm estimatingcivilization probabilities for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e, using speculativepercentagesbasedon the Drake equation and the lack ofevidence for intelligentlife.

Charting speculative odds

I'm crafting a chart with exoplanet names andcivilizationlikelihoodpercentages, grounded in the longtimeline oflife'sevolution, despite the speculativenature of these figures.

Identifying exoplanet contenders

I’m evaluating exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b, TRAPPIST-1 e, and Kepler-186f, considering theirstar types and distances, to gauge their potential for supporting advancedcivilizations from oursolar system'sviewpoint.

Weighing proximity and observation

I'm leaning towards Proxima Centauri b due toits closeness and observational potential, despite concerns aboutitsflarestar dynamics. TRAPPIST-1 e, f, or g are also worth considering.

Revisiting exoplanet options

I'mfocusingon exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b, Ross 128 b, LHS 1140 b, TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, andK2-18b,aiming to chart theirlikelihood of hosting a civilizedsocietybasedon current knowledge.

Assessing exoplanet potentials

I'm gathering speculative probabilities for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, using the Drake equation and current understanding, to better estimate their chances of hosting a civilizedsociety.

Refining speculative probabilities

I’m refining speculative probabilities for exoplanets, including Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, to estimate their chances of hosting a civilizedsociety, consideringEarth's long biologicalhistory.

Refining odds

I'm considering theastronomicaltimeline for intelligentlifeonEarth,leading me toassign evenlower speculative odds for exoplanetslike Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e.

Clarifying speculativenature

I’m crafting a simplified chart with arbitrarypercentages, clearly noting the speculativenature and lack of scientific data, while considering the target audience'sbasic understanding of the topic.

Mappingout speculative odds

I’m charting arbitrarypercentages for exoplanets, clarifying their speculativenature, and ensuring the datais accessible foryoung audiences with minimal scientific detail.

Crafting a chart

I’m creating amarkdowntable with speculativepercentages forthe likelihood of civilizedlifeon exoplanets, emphasizing their purely theoreticalnature and considering the understandinglevel of an 8-year-old.

Integrating speculative analysis

I’m mappingout amarkdown chart with speculativepercentages forthe likelihood of a civilizedsocietyon exoplanets, mindful of thecomplexity and simplifying for an 8-year-old's understanding.

Assessinglikelihoods

I’m piecingtogethermarkdown for exoplanets, noting Proxima Centauri b'sreduced civilizedlife chance due to thered dwarf's activity. This inclusionhighlights the speculativenature of the analysis.

Piecingtogether speculative odds

I’m detailing amarkdown chart for audience-friendly exoplanetlikelihoods, considering environmental challengesand adding a disclaimer about the speculativenature and lack ofevidence.

Piecingtogether

I’m leaning towards Proxima Centauri b forits proximity and silentstar, butI’lladd a speculative chart ranking nearby exoplanets, noting their advancedcivilizations' hypotheticallikelihood.

Assessingcivilization probabilities

I'm emphasizing the slow emergence of intelligentlifeonEarth, which suggests that the odds ofany habitableplanet developing acomplexcivilization might beaslowas a fewpercent.

Belowis a very speculative chart that—basedon what we know aboutEarth’s long, windingpath fromsimplelife to a “civilizedsociety” and our limited observations of nearby exoplanets—gives somefun,made‑uppercentage chances for a few of our best candidate exoplanets. Remember: Scientists havenot yetfoundany proof oflife (let alone advancedcivilizations)onany exoplanet. Thesenumbers are just playful estimates to helpyou think about theideas!

Speculative Chances of Finding an AdvancedCivilizationon Nearby Exoplanets

Exoplanet EstimatedLikelihood of a CivilizedSociety

Proxima Centauri b ~2%

TRAPPIST-1 e ~1.5%

TRAPPIST-1 f ~1%

TRAPPIST-1 g ~1%

LHS 1140 b ~0.5%

HowDid We (Very Roughly) Guess TheseNumbers?

Earth’s Example:

OnEarth,life beganassimple single‑celled organisms and took billions of years to evolve into a species that builtcomplex societies. This longjourney suggests that—even if aplanetis in the “habitablezone” (where liquid water could exist)—developing an advanced, civilizedsociety might be rare.

Nearby Exoplanets:

Proxima Centauri b:

Thisis the closest exoplanet to us. Even thoughitsstar (Proxima Centauri)is ared dwarf that sometimes sendsout strongflares (which might harmlife),its closeness makesitone of ourmost interesting candidates. That’swhy we giveit a slightly higher guess (~2%).

TRAPPIST-1 System (e, f, g):

Theseplanets are part of agroup orbiting a verycoolstar. Their environments might be challenging (for example, they could be tidally locked, meaningone sidealwaysfaces thestar), so the chance of acomplex, advancedcivilization might be abitlower.

LHS 1140 b:

Thisplanetis promising in some ways butis alittle fartherawayand around a dimmerstar, so our playful estimateis evenlower.

AFinalNote

All of thesepercentages are extremely rough guessesbasedon whatlittle we understand about the conditions forlife andintelligence. Scientists useideaslike the Drake Equation to think about these chances—but until we have concreteevidence, thesenumbers remain just forfun and imagination.

Enjoy exploring theseideas—and remember, spaceis full of mysteries waiting to be discovered!

あなた:

Please examine the Drake Equationitself and see if this euqationis acculate ormore opition in the equationyouwill use

ChatGPT

Reasoned about the Drake Equationを6 秒行う

re-examining the Drake Equation

evaluating the Drake Equation'svalue

Clarifying the Drake Equation

OK, let me see. The Drake Equationisn't a precise formula;it'smore of a guiding heuristic that tackles numerous uncertainties regarding extraterrestrialcivilizations.

Assessing the Drake Equation

Thinking through the Drake Equation, I’m evaluatingits conceptualnature,its uncertain parameters, andits criticism to concludeonits reliabilityas an accurate predictivemodel.

Understanding the Drake Equation

I’m mappingout the Drake Equationas a conceptual guide, detailingits parameters, which are oftenbasedon estimates or opinions, to evaluateits reliability for predicting extraterrestrialcivilizations.

The Drake Equationis a famous formula thatwas created to help scientists think about the manyfactors involved in estimating thenumber of detectable extraterrestrialcivilizations in ourgalaxy. However, when welookat the equation closely, we see thatitismore of a conceptualframework or heuristictool than a precise, predictive formula.Let’sbreak downwhy:

The Drake Equation

The equationis usually writtenas:

𝑁

=

𝑅

∗

×

𝑓

𝑝

×

𝑛

𝑒

×

𝑓

𝑙

×

𝑓

𝑖

×

𝑓

𝑐

×

𝐿

N=R

∗

×f

p

​

×n

e

​

×f

l

​

×f

i

​

×f

c

​

×L

Where:

𝑅

∗

R

∗

: The averagerate ofstar formationper year in ourgalaxy.

𝑓

𝑝

f

p

​

: The fraction of thosestars that haveplanetary systems.

𝑛

𝑒

n

e

​

: The averagenumber ofplanets that could potentially supportlifeperstar withplanets.

𝑓

𝑙

f

l

​

: The fraction of thoseplanets wherelife actually develops.

𝑓

𝑖

f

i

​

: The fraction ofplanets withlife where intelligentlife evolves.

𝑓

𝑐

f

c

​

: The fraction ofcivilizations that develop technology that releases detectablesignals into space.

𝐿

L: The length oftime suchcivilizations release detectablesignals.

Why the Drake EquationIsMore of a Guideline Than a Precise Formula

Uncertain Inputs:

Well-Known Parameters:

Somefactors,like

𝑅

∗

R

∗

(star formationrate) and

𝑓

𝑝

f

p

​

(fraction ofstars withplanets), have become better known through modernastronomy.

Highly SpeculativeFactors:

The parameters related to the development oflife andintelligence—

𝑓

𝑙

f

l

​

,

𝑓

𝑖

f

i

​

,

𝑓

𝑐

f

c

​

, and

𝐿

L—arebasedon very limited data. For example,Earthis theonlyplanet we know wherelifehas developed, so we have no way to compare or derive a statistically robust estimate for thesefactors. This means that thevalues chosen for these parameters are largely subjective estimates or educated guesses.

Wide Ranges of PossibleValues:

Because many of thesefactors are not well-constrained, ifyouchangeone of themore uncertain parameters even slightly, thefinal estimate for

𝑁

N (thenumber ofcivilizations) can varyby many orders ofmagnitude. This wide range shows that the equation canlead to very differentoutcomesbasedonpersonal or theoreticalassumptions.

Heuristic, Not Predictive:

The Drake Equationwas never meant to provide a preciseanswer. Instead,it servesas a way to organize our thinking about what conditions might be necessary for the development of extraterrestrialcivilizations.It encourages discussion about the relative importance of differentfactors andhighlights where our scientific knowledgeis limited.

Is the Drake Equation Accurate orMore Opinion-Based?

Accurate?

In thesense ofbeing a strict mathematicalmodel with well-defined inputs and predictableoutputs, the Drake Equationis not accurate.Its accuracyis limitedbythe extreme uncertainties in several ofitskey parameters.

Opinion-Based?

Many of the terms in the equation, especially those concerning theevolution oflife andintelligence, arebasedon opinion, interpretation, and the single example ofEarth. Therefore, while thestructure of the equationis logical, thenumbersyou put intoit (and hence thefinal result) are oftenmore reflective of our current opinionsand assumptions than of robust empirical data.

Conclusion

The Drake Equationis a valuabletool for framing the question of extraterrestriallife.It helps scientists and enthusiastsbreak down acomplex problem into smaller,more manageable questions. However, because several ofitsfactors are highly uncertain and subject topersonal interpretation,itismore of a conceptual guide—or even a way to stimulate discussion—than a formula that provides a definitive, accurate prediction of thenumber of extraterrestrialcivilizations.

Insummary, while the Drake Equationis useful for thinking about the variousfactors that mightlead to the emergence of acivilization,itsoutputs should betakenas highly speculative estimates rather than precise measurements.

あなた:

Please also consider the possiblities of non-human intelligent emrgencing from the longhistory ofSol system and nearbyplanets and see if thereisany possiblites that inonetime intelligentlife emerged in nearbyplanets and see this to the equation

ChatGPT

Reasoned about non-humanintelligence and the Drake Equationを19 秒行う

Evaluating non-humanintelligence

I'm thinking about the potential for non-human intelligentlife forms in theSol system and neighboringplanets, and how this mightfactor into the equation.

Piecingtogether possibilities

I'm thinking about how to integrate the emergence of non-human intelligentlife, possiblyonMars orEuropa, into the Drake Equation for theSol system and neighboringplanets.

Reflectingon potential

It's interesting to think about the hypothesis of intelligentlife emergingonMars orVenus, thoughEarth remains theonly knownlife-supportingplanet in thesolar system.

Considering other realms

I'm examining if intelligentlife could have emergedonplanetslikeMars,Venus, orEuropa, and how thispossibility alignswith the predictions of the Drake Equation.

Analyzing parallelevolution

Hmm, I’m thinking about how non-human intelligentlifeonMars orVenus could intersectwith theassumptions of the Drake Equation, which seems tofocussolelyonEarth-basedevolution.

Evaluatinglife exploration

I’m piecingtogether the hypothesis of non-human, advanced, intelligentlife in thesolar system.Mars,Venus, and Titan present challenges, butEuropa and Enceladus might harbor microbiallife.

Adapting the equPermalink |記事への反応(0) | 21:12

ツイートシェア

■タイアーって読んでた

tieはタイって読むし

Permalink |記事への反応(0) | 19:00

ツイートシェア

■anond:20231007230329

物理的に何か製造する場合は初期コストがかかるわけだろ

ソフトウェアってのは基本的に論理的産物だから低コストで利益を生み出せる

Googleも自社の利益保護のために「レバレッジ」という語を検閲対象にしてる

「市場シェア」「規模」「ネットワーク効果」「レバレッジ」「閉じ込め」「囲い込み」「バンドル」「縁(tie)」といった言葉が避けるべき言葉に指定されていたとのこと。

https://article.auone.jp/detail/1/1/1/48_1_r_20230915_1694759732856609

Permalink |記事への反応(0) | 23:06

ツイートシェア

■SAY!DO IT's SAY!SHOWGUY's

Thinkall tall ralenow rubbergot cheese yey!

Sorayguy weretie for day!

Permalink |記事への反応(0) | 23:03

ツイートシェア

■USB-Cとかいう表記

USB Type-Cって省略せんで書けよと思ったんだけど、英語圏だとヤベーのか？

type Cとtie pussyって発音同じなのか？何気なくUSB Type C cableって言ったつもりが、USB●んこ締め紐に聞こえてたりするわけか？

• アッポー

Type-C表記避けてるわ

https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/specs/

https://www.apple.com/macbook-air/specs/

• ルーデー、エッチピー

不通にType-Cって書いてあるわ

https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/cty/pdp/spd/xps-13-9310-2-in-1-laptop

https://www.hp.com/us-en/shop/pdp/hp-spectre-x360-laptop-15t-eb100-touch-3r480av-1

結論

アッポーだけ表記がおかしい。

Permalink |記事への反応(0) | 12:28

ツイートシェア

■絆、絆される

bond,tieなど

Permalink |記事への反応(0) | 22:07

ツイートシェア

■C++/Perl/Rubyはゴミ

分かったのは言語の多機能さというのは、一点水準さえ満たしていれば、それ以上足しても生産性に寄与しないという事

自分しか使わない、最初書くときに限れば書きやすいと思うこともあるが、それ以上に保守性を落とす

ライブラリを利用したり他人のコードを読む機会の方が多い昨今マイナス要素でしかない

perlのスローガンだかに "There'sMore ThanOne Way ToDo It." というのがあるらしいが、読む側からするとたまったもんじゃない

演算子がオーバーロードされてるかも？モンキーパッチされてないかな？等々あれこれ想定しなきゃいけないのが苦痛でしかない

スラムダンクで流川が沢北を抜いたのも

パスの選択肢を見せた事で沢北が集中できなくなってしまったから

それほど選択肢が多いということはストレスになる

Rubyはゴミ

DSL(笑)が良いと思ってるのは最初だけで、最終的に負債にしかならない糞コード

統計・機械学習系のライブラリが皆無で先細りのイメージしかないからRailsと一緒に心中ください

Perlはゴミ

リスト評価、スカラー評価とか意味わかんねーくくりもtie変数もアイディアは糞中の糞

Perl6にいたってはわけわかんねー演算子のオンパレードで悪いところをさらに悪くした感じ

C++はゴミ

テンプレートもマクロもboostも何もかもダメ意味不明

オーバーロードされまくりのコードなんてどっから読んでいいかわかんねーよ

こんな意味不明なことを覚えていられるほど人生長くない

結局PythonとかGo言語が現実的な解で黒魔術のある言語なんて意味ない要らない使わない

Permalink |記事への反応(2) | 01:52

ツイートシェア

■英語とジョークが得意な増田来てくれ

Amanis driving down acountry road when he loses control ofhiscar andends up in a ditch. Hegetsout of thecar and knockson a farmhouse door for help. He explainshis situation tothe farmer.The farmergetshis horse and they walk to thecrash scene.The farmer then usesrope totie the horse to thecar

"Pull, Zoomer, pull"the farmer shouts, but the horse doesn'tmove.

"Pull, Radar, pull"the farmer yellsagain, butagain, the horse standsstill

"Pull, Dasher, pull" yellsthe farmer, but the horse standslike arock.

"Pull, Dusty, pull" shoutsthe farmer, and the horse finallygets thecarout with minimal effort.

The driveris dumbfounded so he asksthe farmer, "why doyou callyour horse different names?"

"You see,"the farmer replies, "Dustyis blind. If he knew hewas workingby himself, he wouldn't have pulled."

オチというか面白いところが分からんのだが、是非教えてほしい。

Permalink |記事への反応(1) | 12:59

ツイートシェア

■Just wanna know ◆Free! ES◆English ver.

Free!EternalSummerキャラクターソング

山崎宗介 "Just wanna know" の歌詞を英訳しました。

間違いや改善点などありましたらご指摘いただけると幸いです。

二次使用も可能です。使用する際はコメント欄にて一言いただけると嬉しいです。

I've translated the lyrics of "Free!EternalSummer character songby Sousuke Yamazaki" "Just wanna know".

TranslatingJapanese, making rhyme inEnglish, trying to sync translated lyricswith themusic,etc,allat the sametime were quite hard...lol

I'dappreciateany feed-backslike pointingout my mistakes or giving me some improvements.

Using myversion of translated lyrics isalways fine, but before u useit,plz let me know in the comment section herein below.

Plus I'd reallylove to hear if u guys sing this and uploadit toYouTube/Tumbler/etc :P

Just wanna know

somethin' inyour eyes

isthe reason movin'you

beyondthe world 'bout to close off

on thepath to the new picked hope

on thepath to the new picked hope

pleasetell me whatyou see

let'sgo back to the samesummer

just wanna knowthe reason

in thetie of relay

there'll be the feelin'

Istilldon't know (know)

was I able tohide my face surprised?

you'realwaysonyour way, way

whatdid I swallow?

by sendin' offyour runnin' back

(woah-woah) (woah-woah) (woah)

meddlin' even in the each way of thinkin'

wasn't a choice for ustwo (,wasit?)

somethin' inyour eyes

isthe reason movin'you

it'salways clear, isn'tit?

someday I just wanna know the meanin' of "team"

themoment to be real is just in there

(woah-woah) (woah-woah) (woah-woah)

howdeepwasyourheart healed

by the scenery showedby those guys?

you are questionin' to myemptyheart

a tiny but brand newdream

thingslike "ties" are enough for me, right?

but seemslike there'remore than that

different from thosedays

(something I just wanna find)

kickin' the water straight

divin' toreachbeyond thelight

just a few meters ahead, ahead

just wanna knowthe reason

thetie of relaywilltell me, me

somethin' inyour eyes

isthe reason movin'you

beyondthe world 'bout to close (off)

on thepath to the new picked hope, hope

pleasetell me whatyou see

the scenery inyour eyes

(ah-ah) (woah)

is the samesummer in myeyes

Permalink |記事への反応(0) | 12:49

ツイートシェア

■アグリコラ NLデッキ の誤訳訂正と補足

アグリコラのNLデッキについて、Table Games in the Worldで和訳が公開された。

• アグリコラNLデッキ(1)
• アグリコラNLデッキ(2)
• アグリコラNLデッキ(3)
• アグリコラNLデッキ(4)
• アグリコラNLデッキ(5)

以前、アグリコラWMデッキについて誤訳等を指摘する記事を書いたことがあるが、今回もいくつか気になった点について指摘・補足をしておきたい。

相変わらず匿名ダイアリーでの指摘となる失礼を詫びるとともに、和訳公開について（そしてWMデッキについては日本語版発売への尽力について）感謝を捧げたい。

なお、英文は手元にあるNLデッキの英語版のテキストを参照した。（以下の指摘の中にはドイツ語版と英語版で内容が異なることに由来するものが含まれている可能性がある。）

NL001

誤：「収穫前のラウンドに」

正：「収穫直後のラウンドに」

英文は in a round immediately following aHarvest

NL004

誤：「同数の場合、あなたが1人を選ぶ。誰も乳を出す動物をもっていない、または全員同数の場合は誰ももらえない」

正：「あなたと他のプレイヤーが同数の場合は、あなただけが小麦1を得る。あなた以外の複数のプレイヤーが同数の場合や、誰も乳を出す動物をもっていない場合には、誰ももらえない」

英文は Ifyoutie forthe most,only you receive the Grain. Iftwo otherplayerstie or noonehas dairy animals, noone receives the Grain.

NL015

補足：「自分の」とは「あなたの」の意味。なおこの効果は義務ではなく任意。

NL019

補足：主語は「いずれかのプレイヤーが」。

NL020

補足：本当に「1回だけ」かどうかは英文からはよく分からない。

NL022

補足：「本棚」という名前のカードは既に存在する（K112）。

NL024

補足：木材の置かれたスペースは、使用済みと扱われる。

NL026

誤：「住居の部屋1つについて、」

正：「住居（全体）に」

英文は every Unused farmyard space orthogonally adjacent toyourhome

NL031

補足：つまり、はじめから野菜2が植えられた状態の野菜畑として登場したあと、通常通り収穫フェイズに野菜1を収穫していき、空けばまた野菜を植えることができる、ということ。

NL036

補足：英文には「ラウンド1人目の家族で」に相当する条件は無い。

NL039

誤：「食料を勝手に捨ててはいけない」

正：「食料を勝手に捨てても構わない」

英文はYoumay giveFood to the general supplyatanytime

NL040

誤：「（ラウンド11までに出す）」

正：「（ラウンド11またはそれ以降にのみ出せる）」

補足：また、「牛車」という名前のカードは既に存在する（K134）。

NL046

補足：「最も少ない人から1人に与える」とは、「最も少ない人からランダムに1人を選んでその人に与える」の意味。

NL047

補足：収穫の対象となるのは自分の全ての小麦畑

NL054

補足：まず食料1から置き始める

NL055

誤：「（取られないままラウンドが終わったらなくなる）」

正：「（取られないままラウンドが終わっても以降のラウンドに取れる）」

英文は even in a following round

NL058

補足：除外されるのはこの進歩カードをプレイするために用いた家族コマ。「このカードは、除外できる家族がいるときのみ出せる。」の意味は不明確だが、対応する英文では、「このカードは、家族コマを用いてアクションをする場合にのみプレイできる」となっている。

NL059

補足：畑を耕すたびに取ることができるのは野菜1つだけ。

NL064

補足：「柵で囲われていない農場スペース1マス」とは「未使用スペース1マス」のこと。

また、「羊飼い」という名前のカードは既に存在する（E203）。

NL066

補足：「いずれかのプレイヤーが」漁を使うたび、「あなたは」1勝利点を得る。

NL071

補足：対象となる4マスのうち、今プレイしている家族を除いて、既に埋まっていたマスの数の分だけの追加食料を得るということ。

NL072

誤：「共通のストックの食料1」

正：「あなたの手元の食料1」

NL073

誤：「このカードを出したラウンドには、どのアクションスペースも空きスペースとなる。家族コマ（自分の家族も含む）が置かれていても、そこに自分の家族コマを置いてアクションができる」

正：「このカードを出したラウンドには、どのアクションスペースも（あなたにとっては）空きスペースと扱う。家族コマ（自分の家族も含む）が置かれていても、そこに自分の家族コマを置いてアクションができる。これ以降のラウンドには、他のプレイヤーの最後の家族によって使われたアクションスペースは、（あなたにとっては）空きスペースと扱う。」

翻訳漏れ。

NL083

誤：「かご製造所」

正：「かご製作所」

NL092

補足：訳が分かりにくいので別の訳を。「2番目の家族で『家族を増やす』（ステージ2）のアクションスペースを使うたび、その家族を別のアクションスペースに移動させてそのアクションを行うことができる。『家族を増やす』のアクションスペースは新生児によって占有されたままにしておく。」

NL096

補足：英文には「それらを全てアクションスペースに残して」に対応する部分は無い。（小麦と資材については additional と形容されているので、食料も獲得できる前提。）

NL100

誤：「ほかのアクションは無効となる」

正：「ほかのアクションには影響を与えない」

英文は This carddoes not affect additional actionson those space. なので、改築＋厩とか、増築＋大進歩ということになるのではないか。

NL104

和訳ではNL104とNL112が同じ効果のカードとされているが、英語版では両者は異なる。NL104の内容は次の通り。

「『畑1を耕す』または『畑 そして/または 種をまく』のアクションスペースを使うたびに、そのアクションを行う前に、収穫の畑フェイズを行ってもよい。（これは収穫にはカウントしない。）」

NL105

補足：食料も3つ以上必要である。また、「木こり」という名前のカードは既に存在する（E176）。

NL114

補足：食料1を支払うタイミングは、このカード上に家族を置こうとする時

NL116

補足：その食料供給フェイズに野菜を変換することで得られた食料によって食料供給する場合には食料1で足りる、という意味。

NL118

補足：「じゃがいも掘り」という名前のカードが既に存在する（E32）。

NL119

補足：同じ種類の品物を同時に複数得ることはできない

Permalink |記事への反応(0) | 02:47

ツイートシェア