• 0 Posts
  • 43 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle



  • Thanks for the link and breakdown.

    It sounds like a better description of the estimated thinking speed would be 5-50 bits per second. And when summarizing capacity/capability, one generally uses a number near the top end. It makes far more sense to say we are capable of 50 bps but often use less, than to say we are only capable of 10 but sometimes do more than we are capable of doing. And the paper leans hard into 10 bps being a internally imposed limit rather than conditional, going as far as saying a neural-computer interface would be limited to this rate.

    “Thinking speed” is also a poor description for input/output measurement, akin to calling a monitor’s bitrate the computer’s FLOPS.

    Visual processing is multi-faceted. I definitely don’t think all of vision can be reduced to 50bps, but maybe the serial part after the parallel bits have done stuff like detecting lines, arcs, textures, areas of contrast, etc.







  • Actual title of the research paper is Elective co-parenting with someone already known versus someone met online: implications for parent and child psychological functioning.

    It compares a small sample of two different co-parenting situations, and while it does conclude they are both within “normal range”, it certainly doesn’t make or justify the claim in the headline, which doesn’t even mention co-parenting.






  • You are getting confused because you are comparing negations. It’s “visiting the library” that is less extreme than “checking out a book”.

    This is also more of an example of dependency rather than extremity. That is, “checking out a book” could only happen if “visiting the library” happened first. So you could say “I never even travelled to North Korea, let alone bought a souvenir there” – while buying a souvenir is small compared to travelling to NK, the travelling would have to happen first, so the phrase makes sense.