Great video, I bet plenty of physios would say that position is actually great for your back once your body has adapted to that position. Also probably great for digestive system too.

All moral claims are relative and subjective. This is another one that is self-refuting.

ALIENATION of LABOUR will be a HUGE PROBLEM specially in the Age of AUGMENTED GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE G.A.I & MACHINE LEARNING ML.

Hello! For step 34 on your pdf, assembling the flyer, what screw do I use to punch the leather strap and fix into the side across from the eye screw?

Taking another run at this...............................Goedel’s indictment of the logic of mathematics, if that is the proper term, confuses me as per the following. That there is a formal system whose potential scope as it is at any given moment of consideration or as it might be/become in the wake of the addition of some new component would be incapable of proving all statements is common sense. But it relies, I think, on the assumption that the truths claimed to be known as unprovable would remain so. I think this ridiculous. In what is perhaps a departure from the form and function of traditional mathematical proofs, consider the simple logical necessity of the understandings of certain concepts. That 1+1 = 2 requires no proof for its truth is self-evident, notwithstanding Russell’s and Whiteheads Principia Mathematica, which required 379 pages for that purpose. In this statement, 1 is a term applied to the concept “a something by itself”. The term/numeral is merely a proxy for the concept and arbitrarily derived. It could be replaced with “paint can” and as long as all in witness of its presentation as a proxy for a mathematical concept were in agreement with the use of the name, it would function equally as well. 1+1 then is obviously and necessarily “a something by itself” and another “something by itself”, the understanding of the second term/something by itself a product of the same process of the awareness and understanding of the first as a distinct entity or concept. The + term of the proposition is merely an articulation of the concept of the joining of the two together in the same place or in the consideration of the second as another value, the same as the first. No proof required. The = sign is then a term applied to convey the introduction of a concept of what both “something’s by themselves” which is 2, a proxy for the two concepts once joined together. That the proposition 1+1=2 is logical is by definition true and were it not, the mind would be incapable of entertaining or understanding the concept of 1 at all, especially as distinct from the identical concept of 2, no matter what proof might be offered. Continuing on, the statement 2+2=4 is necessarily true and requires no proof by the extension of that above, i.e., that 2, already established as per the above, + another, the joined “somethings by themselves” as a single concept given a new label (4), a proxy for the joining of (2) 2’s. The continuing extension of this architecture would generate additional propositions also true by definition. That one cannot “appeal to truths to formulate a position which denies the existence of truth” (or claim that he “thinks he is not thinking”) is that to which a denial of that above would be akin. Context is also important. Consider a stone yard with two similarly sized piles of rocks of approximately the same dimensions, one granite and one limestone. One could logically call one pile “A” and the other “B” if the context of consideration were only that they were both to be understood as a piles of rocks and the general location of each within the stone yard. That “A” = “B” would be objectively true. However, were a stone mason then to come to the yard and ask for a pile of rocks but of granite, “A” could no longer be said to be equal to “B”. These calculations are also self-evident and require no proofs or calculations. Obviously, in such a manner of extension of proofs of these calculations, one could construct a very complex architecture of mathematical propositions, many if not all the supporting structure of others, none of which could be said to be true but without proof for the proof would be found in that stated above regardless of whether or not there were any axioms for that purpose. That a proposition can be defined initially at all is a product of logic or there could be no proposition defined and not means of calculating its aspects. This is the nature of epistemology and evident of the configuration of the mind itself. So, to reach out to the other end of all of this, one is compelled to ask if Goedel would have denied that above. Apparently he translated through his numbering system (which I don’t understand) a statement which stated that there were mathematical truths for which there were no proofs. This begs a few questions, one of which is that if one can claim that a statement is in fact true, he has to know how and why it is true (as per our necessary understanding of 1+1=2 or he could not make that claim) and that how and why “is” the proof. If, and I find it doubtful, that he was claiming instead that there are mathematical statements that could be made in the pursuit of previously unknown propositions for which as yet no formal process of generating their proofs had been completed, that is interesting but overall, meaningless for as per the epistemological process of that above, they would inevitably be found. I cannot find anyone who can tell me (I think because none knows himself) what would be the mathematical statements employed to have, prior to the process of translation, generated the statement “this statement cannot be proved”. Is it just more self-referencing nonsense like Quine’s liar paradox? How is it that a mathematical system which functions on strictures like those which confine the meaning of 1+1=2 to an unequivocal status, generate a self-cancelling statement like “this statement (is true but) has no proof”? Something is wrong with all this and would challenge anyone to explain how Goedel’s system generated this statement and that from which it was generated. I don’t think anyone can.

Thanks for this video. The wedge on the edge is where I was failing. I would use a cheat cut with a chain saw but I kept wondering how it could be done with just a maul and wedges only. I also don't have a stand. Great video and thank you

When they start outlawing gardens and laying hens for private use...

As far as old spindles they never had a sharp point. Disney as usual LIED. ORIGINAL STORY HAD IT WHERE SLEEPING BEAUTY GOT A WOOD SPLINTER FROM THE WOOD OF THE SPINDLE UNDER NEATHER HER FINGER NAIL. NOT BY SPRICKING HER FINGER ON THE SHARP NEEDLE OF A SPINNIGN WHEELSPINDLE!!! Before refering to any thing be sure to research and knkw what you are saying is accurate and DO NOT TRUST DISNEY!!

Great book. Even if you dont agree with all the ideas, It is revolutionary and makes you question the reality we live in. Do yo have better ideas? great!

At that cost you should have bought better tools.

I am a Christain and understand this completely from a biblical understanding.....God did not create Evil yet the further we get from good and the further away we get from God ...all on our own it becomes sin or in other words incomplete...very well said!

Great Video and great spinner. Thank you!

Was that the last video?

Great Video; ad majorem Dei gloriam.

School as temptation for imitation Outsource quality to university's requirements. Losing soul in worst case Amazing, research shows teachers rely on gut to mark and then use standard to justify it (quality) Quality - remove from the world makes world worse. So it's true. Like dark matter, don't know what it is but we know it's there through the measurementl. If remove quality, there would be things like music that couldn't be explained. Like dark matter, there'd be sense phenomena that cannot be coherently explaindd, but would there Stop making imitative decisions. Instead ask 'what would be quality here'. Because you can see it

An x is quite hard to do, we need the theoretical framework to do this, can't just be a random framework Einstein - evolution will find thecbest hypothesis at that given time (time implies no final answer, new explanations of old facts). The more modern times, the time spans of truth will reduce (more scientific activities run more chance it will be overturned) The theoretical framework can be overturned. And yet science still works

Steel doesnt exist in nature. There is potential for steel (but does this exist in our minds) Logic as a series of relationships

I love that these skills are alive and well. Loved your video of Sally Pointer making sprang weaving. Was this at the same event?

Present at hand - look at broken laptop and can categorise laptop and then broken part as part of reflection Occam's razor can be applied at different levels (not just at machine level but also thinking about applying it your life) Brilliant - reason why a textbook (classical) may be boring because you don't have the romantic actual experience with it. Try and get the practical experience and come back to the textbook. Romantic understanding before classical understanding. Motorbike - system, make sure you consider the 'i' in the system. Same with market, consider your own personality as part of this. All rational logical systems need to consider personality and character of the person. Need to be of their properties, aims, values

Coconut water should work and bind better i would think

Mental models, even if perfect, not equating to reality. Stok mkt

Job with meaning - stay away from coronation (faceless, no connection/ Heal, make it harmonious, rather than run away or try to destroy motorcycle (system). As some sort of golden mean The last of the human freedoms, choose your response to situation (existentialist). Freedom Fire depends on approach whether it's good or not Right attitude leads to right knowledge

Motorcycle as a series of relationships not an object

Interesting, creative writing, a good teacher will want papers that are different, not the same, so teaching it is difficult Interesting looking but not seeing (too many hypothesis), so needs to narrow down

Thats really interesting... i'll take note of that once I start doing foundary stuff

Homemade crucibles from native clay? That's some serious dedication man, I absolutely love it. Very cool experiment.

So you got the knowledge? Impressive

31:15 it might be from Meteorites when they rust basicly have the same color as the ore sometimes or again when they made iron knifes for pharaophs when they would rust they could see it looks very similar to ore.... or Iron paint on ceramics could probabily Reduce i mean even primitive people from america were doing Black on White pottery -->> were fired at temperatures enough to Warp the pots sometimes --- maybe a metalic looking Streaks? orrr when they Tried to make Glass 4000 BC vs iron 5000-3000BC --- they probabily knew that red,orange yellow colors come from not alot of oxygen so maybe someone tried to make from black sand a reduced atmosphere red glass and ended up whit weird molten stuff that was unbreakeable??? idk

Leg/knee inline with lower arm (13 inches roughly) Leave a 5mm step on the arm shanks and you will be able to have the arms level as well. 👌. Pre cut centre and leg hole on the laminate and use side profile for long grain finish. Options quickly typed. Great video though. enjoy planing and sanding it round. The bit I don’t enjoy at allllll. This was my very first from an oak log. I really should add a new video as this was 8yrs ago kzbin.info/www/bejne/rpPalXecpL-Bqqssi=xceCS1FDK6KR-eEl

Watt's condenser blocked the opposing force of 14.7psi from Atmospheric Pressure. It allowed him to build low pressure Steam Engines and therefore save fuel.

Great vid! I've watched several vids about these anvils trying to make a decision but Your did best at pointing out the difference and what extra you get for the extra cost! Liked and subbed! Thanks!

I have a question. would / could you make a video on how to make a charkha spinning wheel using a Wooden Yarn Ball Winder. Thanking you in advance.

11:11 actual start

So, just the act of framing a question for an LLM should help improve our clarity of thought. Will the exercise expose our weak logic or unfalsifiable assumptions? Thanks again for presenting your ideas.

Awesome insights, thank you.

I had never considered applying the methodology of courtroom direct and cross examination for framing LLM queries. Follow up requests to identify weaknesses in a held position makes a lot of sense. I like this concept very much! (I'm grateful for this information and hope technical issues may be easily resolved in the future)

Since my daughter has been enjoying the normal crunch labs boxes, I've been looking into these, so it's nice to see this kind of review

The author ignores the amount of resources that AI requires, and that AI is biased based upon the human in puts/programing in the AI's training.

Tools are neutral. It the how they are used and to what end that is human (beneficial or harmful). Technological systems are human made, so can be constructed with a bias.

That's adorable you should give them two together that way they germinate and keep on multiplying every year

Beautiful way to show love

This Dutchie approves!

This is awesome! I hope to see what it looks like in the spring!

It's like reverse Easter egg hunting.

I bet your squirrels are all up in the trees pondering what you guys are giving them 😂

Love to see curiosity at work, especially in young people. Have you got a good approach to dealing with kid's questions you can't answer?😊

She is so pretty

They are going to be so proud when they see growth & beauty. Beautiful family fun❤Happy Holidays Family🕊️🌲🍃🌺🍃

Good ❤❤❤ pparenting

What beautiful family you have!!! God bless you with joy and health!!