Proxy is a step below VPN since it doesn’t tunnelise data.

Anti-detect browsers. Do you mean Tor? It’s a decent solution, albeit the slowest one.

What people use to bypass the great Chinese firewall is VPN with VLESS protocols. Unlike usual VPN protocols, those are specifically made to bypass censorship.

Any government already has all of that information, so, no.

By giving it to a company, you just increase the risks of info leakage.

A little background info:

Russia’s been sponsoring one of its oligarchs’ business by eliminating their competition.

First, they restricted YouTube’s speed to an unusable state to force people to switch to RuTube (they didn’t)

Now they’re trying to force people to switch from WhatsApp (and potentially Telegram) to MAX, which they want to be Russia’s version of WeChat.

Add the fact that our politicians are obsessed with controlling all of the media and you’ll get the gist of it.

People don’t predict values to determine their answers to questions…

Also, it’s called neural network, not because it works exactly like neurons but because it’s somewhat similar. They don’t “run on neural networks”, they’re called like that because it’s more than one regression model where information is being passed on from one to another, sort of like a chain of neurons, but not exactly. It’s just a different name for a transformer model.

I don’t know enough to properly compare it to actual neurons, but at the very least, they seem to be significantly more deterministic and way way more complex.

Literally, go to chatgpt and try to test its common reasoning. Then try to argue with it. Open a new chat and do the exact same questions and points. You’ll see exactly what I’m talking about.

Alzheimer’s is an entirely different story, and no, it’s not stochastic. Seizures are stochastic, at least they look like that, which they may actually not be.

It’s not. It’s a math formula that predicts an output based on its parameters that it deduced from training data.

Say you have following sets of data.

1. Y = 3, X = 1
2. Y = 4, X = 2
3. Y = 5, X = 3

We can calculate a regression model using those numbers to predict what Y would equal to if X was 4.

I won’t go into much detail, but

Y = 2 + 1x + e

e in an ideal world = 0 (which it is, in this case), that’s our model’s error, which is typically set to be within 5% or 1% (at least in econometrics). b0 = 2, this is our model’s bias. And b1 = 1, this is our parameter that determines how much of an input X does when predicting Y.

If x = 4, then

Y = 2 + 1×4 + 0 = 6

Our model just predicted that if X is 4, then Y is 6.

In a nutshell, that’s what AI does, but instead of numbers, it’s tokens (think symbols, words, pixels), and the formula is much much more complex.

This isn’t intelligence and not deduction. It’s only prediction. This is the reason why AI often fails at common sense. The error builds up, and you end up with nonsense, and since it’s not thinking, it will be just as confidently incorrect as it would be if it was correct.

Companies calling it “AI” is pure marketing.

We teach the fundamentals

Sure. They are, however, not the focus. At least that’s not how I’ve been taught in school. You’re not teaching kids how to prove the quadratic formula, do you? No, you teach them how to use it instead. The goal here is different.

They only teach order of operations.

Again, with the order of operations. It’s not a thing. I’ve given you two examples that don’t follow any.

The constructivist learners…

That’s kinda random, but sure?

And many proofs of other rules…

They all derive from each other. Even those fundamental properties are. For example, commutation is used to prove identity.

But the order you apply operators does matter

2+2-2 = 4-2 = 2+0 = 0

2 operators, no order followed.

If we take your example

2+3×4 then it’s not an order of operation that plays the role here. You have no property that would allow for (2+3)×4 to be equal 2+3×4

Look, 2+3×4 = 1+3×(2+2)+1 = 1+(6+6)+1 = 7+7 = 14

Is that not correct?

Notably you picked…

It literally has subtraction and distribution. I thought you taught math, no?

2-2 is 2 being, hear me out, subtracted from 2

Same with 2×(2-2), I can distribute the value so it becomes 4-4

No addition? Who cares, subtraction literally works the same, but in opposite direction. Same properties apply. Would you feel better if I wrote (2-2) as (1+1-2)? I think not.

Also, can you explain how is that cherry-picking? You only need one equation that is solvable out of order to prove order of operation not existing. One is conclusive enough. If I give you two or more, it doesn’t add anything meaningful.

Yes we are

Yes and no. You teach how to solve equations, but not the fundamentals (and if you do then kudos to you, as it’s not a trivial accomplishment). Fundamentals, most of the time, are taught in universities. It’s so much easier that way, but doesn’t mean it’s right. People call it math, which is fair enough, but it’s not really math in a sense that you don’t understand the underlying principles.

Yes there is!

Nope.

There’s only commutation, association, distribution, and identity. It doesn’t matter in which order you apply any of those properties, the result will stay correct.

2×2×(2-1)/2 = 2×(4-2)/2 = 1×(4-2) = 4-2 = 2

As you can see, I didn’t follow any particular order and still got the correct result. Because no basic principle was broken.

Or I could also go

2×2×(2-1)/2 = 4×(2-1)/2 = 4×(1-0.5) = 4×0.5 = 2

Same result. Completely different order, yet still correct.

My response to the rest goes back to the aforementioned.

That’s because (strictly speaking) they aren’t teaching math. They’re teaching “tricks” to solve equations easier, which can lead to more confusion.

Like the PEMDAS thing that’s being discussed here. There’s no such thing as “order of operations” in math, but it’s easier to teach by assuming that there is.

Edit: To the people downvoting: I want to hear your opinions. Do you think I’m wrong? If so, why?

The “why” goes a little further than that.

In actuality, it’s because of fundamental properties of operations

• Commutation

a + b = b + a

a×b = b×a

• Association

(a + b) + c = a + (b + c)

(a×b)×c = a×(b×c)

• Identity

a + 0 = a

a×1 = a

If you know that, then PEMDAS and such are useless because they’re derived from those properties but do not fully encompass them.

Eg.

3×2×(2+2) = 3×(4+4) = 12+12 = 24

This is a correct solution that is improper if you’re strictly adhering to PEMDAS rule as I’ve done multiplication before parenthesis from right to left.

I could even go completely out of order by doing 3×2×(2+2) = 2×(6+6) and it will still be correct

Oh yeah, that’s a fun one.

Where I live, this would be considered juxtaposition, at least by uni professors and scientific community, so 2(4-2) isn’t the same as 2×(4-2), even though on their own they’re equal.

This way, equations such as 15/2(4-2) end up with a definite solution.

So,

15/2(4-2) = 3.75

While

15/2×(4-2) = 15

Usually, however, it is obvious even without assuming juxtaposition because you can look at previous operations. Not to mention that it’s most common with variables (Eg. “2x/3y”).

I’d advise you to read more on how Chinese government and spin dictatorships work. There’s a really good book written by Treisman and Guriev

It’s not really a country you’d choose over US even despite all it’s massive (cough healthcare and consumer protections cough) flaws

“Anymore” as if it ever was. Even USSR never claimed to be a communist country

P.S. They claimed to be a socialist, then “developed” socialist country that’s “on the path of building communism”.

Surprised nobody said cell degradation.

You now can live for as long as you’re not killed whilst physically keeping an appearance of an ~30 y.o. This also technically prevents cancer.

Ads, complete lack of privacy, kremlinbots.

It used to be the platform that did one thing good. Build communities. Not it does a lot of things, but all of them badly.

Not to mention that their owners are the main reason why “YouTube works bad, because Google’s servers are degrading”. Basically, Roscomnadzor (an official government censorship service) has been making YouTube unusable for over a year now to make people switch to VK Video or Rutube (both owned by same entity) whilst pretending that it doesn’t. Did it work? According to them, yes. According to reality, however, the vast majority just switched to using VPN.

It’s simple math and understanding of the law, what does political affiliation has to do with it?

0.05$ is not a substantial amount of money regardless of your political views.

Am I missing some context here that there’s new taxes passed by Trump? (Am not American)

It’s more convenient than dragging a cursor across the screen. Works especially great with a 360° hinge.

Yes, ECC memory. If used, then CPU also needs to be able to support it. Then there’s number of cores, unless you specifically need high single-core performance. Efficient and reliable PSU, low power-consumption, lots of memory, redundancy for storage. Stuff like that.

None of which are essential, BTW. Any working PC can be made into a server regardless of its hardware.

All server really is is just another PC that’s been built with a different purpose in mind. The rest is software configuration. They need to be reliable, scalable, and cost you as little as possible to upkeep.

Even your router is the same. It’s all computers.

Have you ever built PCs? Macs are significantly more expensive for the same spec

The rest I agree with, it doesn’t help that Windows has been steadily going downhill with each new version…

And here’s your other issue…

Nothing of what I said was meant as an offense. Yet you took it to hearts. That is not a response one would normally expect. It’s almost as if I’m reading a script from a teenage drama show where a character has an unresolved inner conflict. Doesn’t mean I’m correct, just some food for thought.

Your question was “why people act like I’m a kid?” I only shared my observations of why that could be the case. That doesn’t mean you need to change anything. Not if you yourself are ok with it.

Also, I was well aware you’re 21 at the moment of writing the comment. Yet again, I’m merely answering your question, I really don’t mean anything beyond what is written. I’m not judging, no nothing, everything I write should be read in as neutral tone as possible.

The rest was me speculating. Those aren’t the questions you should be answering to me, only to yourself. After all, a random stranger on the internet can only do so much, you’re the only one who can answer your own question. Best I can do is point you in a direction to dig further, which those were meant for. It’s all about retrospective.

Not that I’ve looked up your post history as well as the way you type. Everything just screams “14 y.o. girl.” There’s a lot of personality, a lot of bubbliness, everything’s "hyper. " It’s just not something you’d expect of an adult.

Adults are usually more reserved and “battle-worn.” I’d also look at the wardrobe, especially if you’re of smaller stature. Additionally, being an adult is often about taking responsibility. Sucking it up and doing the right thing, so to say. Look at how you’ve behaved in the past in difficult situations, how you’ve handled conflicts. Have you ever taken a proactive role in finding a resolution? This may also be your clue.