calcopiritus

As I said, data cannot be racist. The methodology to obtain it might be.

But then you should not attack the data, you should attack the methodology.

Any good study will explain their methodology along with the data obtained with it.

How is data racism?

Data might lead to racism. Or data might show racism. But data is not racism.

Are you 0.00113636 miles tall though? We use centimeters for height. You are 191cm tall, not 1,91m.

What a weird argument. There is no practical difference between 180°C and 180,5°C. No need for ovens to have decimal precision.

Thermostats do have increments lower than 1°C though. My car's AC increments in 0,5°C steps.

As someone that hates python more each day: you are absolutely wrong on basically every point.

The only thing you are right on is the non-enforced types (not even warning logs!).

First, python doesn't "change all the standards". Languages are different. If they weren't different, there would only be one language. There is no language standard.

for (x in a) is stupid. You want to know what is the "expression" of the for loop? It's everything after the for and before the :. You don't need () at all. In fact () would be confusing since you could argue the in is part of the for loop syntax.

You don't need to import the types you claim you need to import. list, tuple, dict (idk about set) are available without importing.

I won't even explain why you are wrong about data structures and tuples. Just that they are not "array-like".

It doesn't run flawlessly on any OS. Many OS ship with ancient versions of python. So it's incredibly easy to have your script not run on another computer because you used features that are too new. There are also 3rd party dependencies that are OS-dependant. But you cannot know that until you run it and it fails on some random function call. And after hours of research you figure out that that error is because your OS is not the same as the developer's.

It's the winter Olympics though. Some ice is acceptable.

The joke

Your head

You

I didn't like it at all. And nobody I know has liked it.

I was mindblown when I heard it was on the Oscars. It's just a random film, worse than average I'd say.

Point, purpose, whatever. They are synonyms.

Look, you said you didn't understand insurance. I tried to explain to you that the reason you don't understand insurance is because you are wrong about your definition of insurance. If you fixed how you define "insurance" to make sense with how the rest of the world uses it, then you would have a much easier time understanding insurance.

But you refuse to change your definition of insurance. That to me signals that you're not trying to learn, you just want to argue.

If that's the case. Fine, let's argue. But it is hard to argue about something if each of us have a different definition of what that something is.

Yes, you could see insurance as a bet. When giving insurance, you are betting that the insurer will be lucky. But since you have to make a profit, you have to obtain more than the expected value. It is not much different than a casino.

If you bet on a coin toss at a casino and win, you wouldn't get 2x your offer, you might only get 1.9x. That 0.1x is the casino's profit.

If your house has a 50% chance to lose all value in the next year, your insurance payment must be higher than 50% of your houses value. If it is 55%, then that 5% is the insurance companies' profit margin.

If there is no data because nobody has ever been insured, then you just make an educated guess with a low confidence score.

So the last example has a high confidence that it's a 50% chance results in 55%. Let's say you eeucately guess that the chance is 20-80%. The middle point of your guess is still 50%, but due to the low confidence, your margin would need to be higher. In this case, they payment might be 70% instead of 55%.

Now you see why insurance companies need all that data. Higher confidence means lower prices without risk increase, or the same prices with a lower risk. Lower prices allow more market share, which results in more money.

If it were as you said, why would they even need to make predictions? Just adjust the rate according to the pool size. "Oh no, last month was really unlucky and the money pool shrank, we'll increase prices this month", "nice! Last month was lucky and the pool increased, we can lower the price".

As I said, there are many ways to implement insurance.

Again. You are confusing purpose with implementation.

The purpose is what I stated. The implementation is irrelevant. You claim that insurance is insurance only if it is implemented the way you explain. However, as I tried to explain, you can provide insurance without having a large pool of insurers.

Look at this example:

Alice has a tomato farm and wants to buy a goat from Bob. They reach a price of 20 tomatoes for a goat.

However, they live in different villages. Alice pays 2 tomatoes to Charlie to pay for transport. But Alice is worried that bandits will steal the tomatoes or goat from charlie while the transportation is happening.

So Charlie offers Alice this deal: "give me 4 tomatoes instead of 2, and you will receive a goat, even if the goods get stolen in transport".

That is insurance.

Why can Charlie offer such a thing? That's just the implementation, it doesn't matter. But here are a few possibilities:

• Charlie calculated the chances of getting robbed, and calculated that after many insured transports, the value of the insurance payment will be greater than the value of the insured goods.
• Charlie is very confident in himself and has never been robbed. He accepts the risks, and if he does get robbed, he'll make sacrifices to get another goat.
• Charlie paid a cheaper insurance, easy low-risk profit.
• Charlie has plenty of goats, and is willing to lose one of them to strengthen his ties with Alice.
• Charlie does plenty of safe transports with a higher-than-normal insurance price, so even if he is robbed this time, he has enough of apples stored to pay for another goat. (This is the one you are saying)

About your last claim:

Nobody "knows" how much insurance is worth. Insurance companies pay lots of money to obtain data and make calculations about predictions. But it's all statistics. The more data there is, the more accurate the price can be. Companies that make good predictions stay afloat, while bad predictions makes them lose money.

But that goes for absolutely every product. There is no global entity that dictates the prices of products as an absolute fact.

You cannot have an insurance company with a single regular customer the same way you cannot have an iphone shop with a single regular customer.

But the concept of insurance is not only for insurance companies.

You can sell a single instance of insurance to a single customer like you can sell a single instance of an iphone to a single customer.

You can see at what price others are selling similar insurance policies and set your price like that. Or you can set the price with a big benefit margin to compensate for the higher risk you are incurring when selling insurance while having little data.

No. Pooling the resources of all to spend it on the benefit of society (including helping the less-fortunate) is the purpose of taxes.

The purpose of insurance is to trade low chance big impact risks for 100% chance small costs.

As I said, you can have insurance with just one insurer and one insuree. You cannot have taxes with 1 taxpayer and 1 tax collector, that would be called an asset manager or something, where you pay someone to decide for you what to spend that money on.

Merriam-Webster:

1 a : coverage by contract whereby one party undertakes to indemnify or guarantee another against loss by a specified contingency or peril b : the business of insuring persons or property c : the sum for which something is insured 2 : a means of guaranteeing protection or safety The contract is your insurance against price changes. Frequent hand washing is good insurance against the common cold. 3 gambling : a side bet that a player in blackjack may place when the dealer's first faceup card is an ace

Note: An insurance bet can be up to half of a player's original bet. It wins at 2 to 1 odds if the dealer's cards add up to 21.

First of all, I'm going to replace AI with LLM, since that's probably what you meant.

There are 2 distinct questions asked in this post:

1. Why not use LLMs to provide different levels of automation? (Like, manual, medium, auto)

Answer: you don't need LLMs for that. You can just code it in like any other feature. It's not particularly hard, game developers know how to do it since they are used to programming automation for NPCs.

2. Why not use LLMs to procedurally generate NPC dialogue?

Answer: games are primarily a form of art. NPC dialogues are written with a purpose. Different characters have different personalities. Some dialogues are meant to drive the plot. Other dialogues are meant to teach the player how to play. Others are meant to show the player things that they may have missed, or things that are interesting.

Procedural dialogues removes all the control from artists. They would all be generic npc n#473, with the "personality" of the LLM, maybe slightly varied if the developer writes a different prompt for each character.

Procedural dialogues would have the same issues as procedural world generation or photorealistic graphics, it would just not be interesting.

There is a practically infinite amount of Minecraft worlds, yet they all feel the same way. The thing that differentiates a Minecraft world from another is that which the player has built. The only part of the world that wasn't procedurally generated.

There is a great amount of photorealistic games. And they all look very similar. You may only distinguish one from another by looking at their handcrafted worlds or their handcrafted characters. But not by staring at a wall. You can stare at a wall in non-photoreslistic games and know what game it is.

So if you put procedurally generated dialogues, no one will read them, since you'll be bored by the time you read the same thing being said by 5 different NPCs from 5 different games.