Sadnot

First things first, here are the stats: https://i.imgur.com/aMUs2Gn.png

I collected the last hundred comments in r/aiwars (and the last 50 in both r/artisthate and r/defendingAIArt) and tallied whether they were insults, debate, or miscellaneous conversation. Overall, insults made up 19% of total conversation on r/aiwars, 36% of content on r/Artisthate, and 14% of content on r/defendingAIArt.

r/aiwars was the most neutral of the three subs when it came to upvotes, with the upvote/downvote ratio on debate posts and comments being surprisingly similar - both anti/pro got about 2 average points. Miscellaneous comments by Pro-AI commenters were much more highly upvoted than miscellaneou

I often see the fine-tuning argument raised, but I don't often see a critical assessment of the constants that are commonly argued to be "fine-tuned". For example:

1. The gravitational constant, often claimed to be tuned to one part in 10^60, 10^34, or other enormous numbers

2. The cosmological constant, claimed to be tuned to one part in 10^120

3. Universal "flatness", also quoted to me at 10^60.

4. Electromagnetic force, at 10^39.

The truth is, these numbers are all misunderstandings, mistakes, or lies, as far as I can tell. For example, #4, the electromagnetic force, comes from the ratio of the electromagnetic force to the gravitational force between protons and electrons, which is r