I edited/clarified my comment before I saw your reply—apparently the restriction to three dimensions only apples to continuous-time systems, which is what I had in mind when I posted the question.

Hmm… the book I was reading (Complex and Adaptive Dynamical Systems by Claudius Gros) actually said strange attractors only occur in three dimensions or higher, but I changed that to “chaos” in the title to fit the character limit—I thought they were essentially synonymous.

Here’s the quote:

Strange attractors can only occur in dynamical system of dimension three and higher, in one dimension fixpoints are the only possible attracting states and one needs at least two dimensions for limit cycles.

Edit: I see that Gros clarifies a few paragraphs later:

Chaos may arise in one dimensional maps … but continuous-time dynamical systems need to be at least three dimensional in order to show chaotic behavior.

I guess I was mentally thinking of continuous-time systems, but there was no room to fit that in the title.

In the lyrics to the Beatles’ song Piggies, there’s the line “clutching forks and knives”. Is that just an Americanism they picked up?

Nah, that’s what got us the DMCA.

We need laws that are robust and universal enough to accommodate a spectrum of unforeseeable circumstances, not laws that are tailored to one expected future narrative.

Although it might be good to explore possible scenarios for how each law could be abused, and include provisions to void it if they occur.

Nationalism is the belief that the world should consist of ethnically-homogeneous nation-states—so it’s perfectly consistent for nationalists in one country to support other nationalist states outside their own.

That, and war makes for better narratives.

That war is the connective tissue of human history, rather than the holes in the tissue.

deleted by creator

The more abstract and general a theory is, the more different things it can be applied to. If you can figure out how to describe any problem in terms of sets, you immediately have all the theorems of ZFC at your disposal.

Inés Carrasco, who writes the blog Cronicas de San Pedro, said Chipotle might appeal to people who embrace Tex-Mex food because of the city’s proximity to the US, but that history did not bode well for it.

Chipotle’s isn’t Tex-Mex, it’s (a feeble corporate knockoff of) San Francisco Mission-style.

I think there are regional Mexican-American cuisines that could be appreciated in Mexico as their own thing, but chain restaurants don’t do them justice.

Just finishing Angel Down by Daniel Kraus—it’s really good. Reminds me of Cormac McCarthy, with fantasy/magical realism elements thrown in.

There’s a common trend among domesticated animals—they tend to develop more variegated coloring than their wild ancestors.

One theory is that domestication affects traits that involve early embryonic development, and that have a lot of associated changes beyond what was actually selected for (i.e. tameness).

Another possibility is that, in the absence of selection, animals naturally produce more variation in coloration than is seen in the wild—but natural selection is continually weeding out those that are disadvantageous in their current environment.

Did the bacterium evolve to fight cancer in its host just due to selection pressure to prevent host death?

If that’s the case, I’m surprised it was able to do it better than its host’s immune system—I guess bacteria can evolve faster due to shorter generations?

In practice, sure—if nothing else, it means they wanted a tattoo. The mere presence of a tattoo has some cultural relevance, even if the particular design is otherwise meaningless. (Unless they got it involuntarily like an Auschwitz tattoo, which still has meaning of a different kind.)

A correct guess often isn’t based on a single clue, but on using multiple clues to narrow the possibilities down in different ways. So every potential clue matters and should be considered, instead of assuming it’s irrelevant because there are other clues present as well.

why are we here on earth??

Because the other planets are much less hospitable.

At any given moment there’s a full circle of points on the surface of the earth at which the sun has the same given zenith angle. So without any other information, the best you could do is narrow it down to some point on such a circle (and that’s provided you can figure out the difference between the apparent and true horizon, the effects of potential lens distortion, etc.).

The usual issues of longitude and latitude don’t come into play, since those were historically based on a combination of not knowing the precise time, but being able to establish exact latitude based on observing the stars (instead of the sun). In this case you do know the exact time, but you have no independent way to determine latitude.

One thing that might be a factor is the Bernoulli effect (moving air has lower pressure than still air). When your head is in moving air but your chest is in relatively still air, that would create a pressure differential that makes it harder to draw air into your lungs. On a motorcycle, your whole body is in moving air so the pressure differential wouldn’t exist.

Trump also alluded to the role the US had played in the targeted assassinations of the Iranian leadership. “They had leaders. They’re gone. And they had another set of leaders. They’re gone. Now they have another set of leaders. They may be gone,” he said.

The US president noted, “I may be gone, too, because I’m their number one target.” “That’s the way they act,” he added, claiming that he is doing “what’s right for the country”.

So “that’s the way they act”, after describing himself acting that way.

Since Ben Garrison is the one human whose output most closely resembles AI, I imagine this is him having an existential crisis.