User talk:Dmytry

08:12, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Preview
When making a comment or other edit, you can hit "preview" to see the completed edit before it's actually submitted. This may help you consolidate your thoughts, that way you don't have to make four or five edits in a row to express yourself. Hope this helps!-- 10:46, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Ya, sorry. I just tend to post and then think, ohh that is unclear, or this is unclear, etc. Dmytry (talk) 13:55, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Sysop
Before you use your banhammer, read this firstRandonGeneration (talk) 16:03, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'm not much into using banhammers... i don't think i ever even banned anyone from a forum i own/moderate, except maybe for outright commercial spam.

Something to chew on
I know that you're not a fan of the massive modularity thesis (and neither am I), but you should check out Peter Carruthers' defense of a (rather heavily) modified form of it ("moderately massive modularity"). That's probably the most viable pro-MM position -- might give you something to chew on for a while. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 09:16, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Some modularity seems reasonable; nonetheless it would seem to me that we should expect rather minimal tweaks to the basic structure of cortical columns and such, as well as wires thrown in, with the actual use being primarily based on learning; the modules largely arising as a result of learning. One has to keep in mind that brain can itself run hill-climbing extremely faster than evolution could, which seem to be something that evolutionary psychology tends to ignore or not understand. When training a circuit to recognize 3-dimensional imagery, aside from some specialized connection topology that may be evolved, the rest of selection of the best matching neuron weights and such can be done very rapidly by the brain, and even using very dull evolution-like hill climbing algorithm (which is easy to realize), brain could do the equivalent of hundred thousand generations in a few hours (when e.g. training the network to predict visual input). Of course the evolution would tweak what ever is controlled via genes, but that affects the final picture very indirectly. Dmytry (talk) 19:43, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

I've got you a present
It's past the point where your discussions on Talk:LessWrong and Talk:Eliezer Yudkowsky can be considered to be relevant to improving the article. There's not much wrong with discussing a topic on its salient article talkpage, but you and your other have been seriously crowding the space, far more than most non-content related discussions normally do. You're filling up archive page after archive page, and making it more difficult to sort through content discussions. You are also annoying other editors. Thus, I've gotten you a present:

Forum:LessWrong

I would make a new WIGO, but that would just piss off the crowd that hates WIGOs and wants them off the wiki. But at least you have a forum, a place where you can talk about Eliezer Yudlowsky and his fanboys to your heart's content, without wrinkling anything. Please, try and focus new topics to the forum page I've magnanimously crafted for you.-- "Shut up, Brx." 00:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)