This isn't actually strictly true. There's a tricky bit of math involved here, the idea of "certainty". If something is "certain" then we know that it will definitely happen. If something is "not certain" then there is a chance it won't happen, even if that chance is very small. If something is "almost certain" then we know that something will happen if we try infinitely many times.

If I flip a coin once, then I am not certain if it will land on heads at least once.

If I flip a coin a very very large number of times (like a billion) I am still not certain that it will land on heads at least once. That is because there is still a chance that I flip all-tails.

I I flip a coin an infinite number of times then I am almost certain that it will land on heads at least once. This is because in an infinite number of coin flips, the chance of all-tails becomes zero. We are "almost certain" that we will eventually flip a heads, but we are not "certain".

But here's the catch: it is not possible in reality to flip a coin infinitely many times, therefore in reality there is no way for a 100% chance of all-tails to happen. It can get very very very close to 100% but it will never be 100%.

Scan your real life environment into Minecraft

Sounds like a joke but honestly, I'm kinda tempted to implement that...

This is a good answer, and I'd also add that many individuals/companies thrive only because they exist in an ecosystem where everyone contributes to the advancement of software. Amazon makes a lot of money selling cloud computing resources, for example, so it benefits them to make contributions to advance and grow software development in general which then drives more demand for cloud compute.

My bet's on some kind of auto-ML tool which allows organisations to feed data, specify targets, receive predictions.

We have things like that in industry already but I think the burgeoning capabilities of things like Codex and ChatGPT means that we might now be able to have an AI build the AI in a much more intelligent way than before.

tl;dr Skynet

I might occasionally say something to myself but if I do so I will tend to use the same voice that I would use with others - for example if I have made a silly mistake I might grumble an expletive, or I might use a joyous tone if something is funny. I do not think I ever whisper to myself.

For the most part, however, my thoughts stay in my head.

Most people don't say their thoughts out loud at all. Of the minority who do talk to themselves, I'm sure very few have a habit of whispering.

Gasses heat up when they're compressed (squeezed) and cool down when they expand. If you push gas around in a loop, and you have half the loop set up so that it compresses the gas, and in the other half you expand it, you'll have a loop with a hot side and a cold side.

Refrigerators work by using a loop like the one I described above. They put the cold side in the box and the hot side outside the box. Because the cold side is colder than the food and air inside the box, it absorbs some heat. That heat moves with the gas to the hot side, and because the hot side is hotter than the surrounding air it expels some of the heat it's gathered, cooling the gasses again.

Continuously moving heat from inside the box to outside the box means it stays cold and keeps your food chilled.

Disclaimer: Not a doctor, this is what I've learned from a being around vocal performers for most of my life.

Whispering is a surprisingly "high stress" activity for your larynx. When most people whisper they're not just pushing a little air past their vocal folds, they're tightening their vocal folds so much that they can't vibrate and produce the sounds your normal speaking voice produces. That's very tough on your vocal folds and trachea, and can cause or worsen laryngitis and tracheal strain. Whispering a lot is one of the behaviours that singers and ENT doctors might call "vocal cord abuse" and you shouldn't do it - your normal speaking voice is the safest and least stressful option if you want to speak.

You should definitely have a long, mature, sober think about how you're expressing yourself - vocal cord damage can become permanent if it's not taken seriously.

Your vocal tract and trachea are both also very important for swallowing. It's possible what your doctor is saying is that you have irritated, strained, or caused swelling in your larynx or trachea, and that issue is interfering with your ability to swallow fully.

If you're concerned or unsure please get your doctor's professional opinion. This is not a matter to trust to Reddit comments.

Very welcome!

Thats a massive post and I don't have time to parse it out for you, sorry. If you have specific questions about priors I'm happy to try help.

Yup, I got it while writing the comment above lol.

There's a big saliva gland near your jaw called the "parotid gland" and it can respond in a super strong and unpleasant way when you taste certain things, especially alcohol, sugar, or acid. The sucrose and tartaric acid in sweets are both major triggers, as are the tannins and ethanol in wine.

When that salivation happens it can be a sharp pain; for me it's a bit like a small muscle cramp.

Make sure you stay hydrated and try to have some food before eating or drinking things that cause the pain. Dehydration gives you a dry mouth and the parotid gland also has to work harder to produce the saliva you need, and if you're hungry and thirsty your body will also produce more saliva leading to more sharp pain.

As always with medical stuff, you should see your GP if you're concerned.

If you read the examples given, you can see this is the wrong definition for this context.

Hello, AI researcher here!

We borrow the term "prior" or "prior probability" from Bayesian statistics, and in simple language you can think of a "prior" as being "what we believed before we saw the evidence". Prior just means "former" or "before" in Latin. After we see some evidence we update our beliefs, and that becomes our new "prior" for any further reasoning. We use a calculation called Bayes Rule to find our current belief (posterior probability) from our previous belief (prior probability) and some evidence.

The least informative prior, and also the default if we have no information at all, is "I know nothing". If you know nothing about the probability of some event occurring then you regard all outcomes as equally likely. For example, when I roll a fair die I am completely ignorant about the outcome, so my prior is that any outcome has a probability of 1/6.

I can say I have a more informative prior when I know something about the probability of an outcome. If I want the probability of it raining tomorrow, I could say "I know nothing", or I could think about it and actually, the weather today is probably similar to the weather tomorrow, and it was sunny today, so actually my prior is that it's a bit more likely than not to be sunny tomorrow - let's say 65% or so.

===

Your first example is saying that it's silly to spend effort finding a good prior and then forgetting to take into account the actual evidence. For example, if i want to know if it will rain today, it is silly to think about yesterday's weather and forget to just look out the window.

Your second example is talking about how "extreme" a prior is. In Bayesian calculations, if you believe a probability is at 100% or 0% then there is no mathematical way to change it. This is an extreme prior. The more confident you are something will or won't happen, the harder it is to change your mind. The example, then, is saying that it is strange to talk about a "high-uncertainty" prior (one which is nearer to the "I know nothing" default position) as being extreme - without context I cannot tell you why they are saying that.