pineaux

just saying: he is good at vaporware on a large scale and kind of a fucked up person. It's not weird people are skeptical. But he also has basically an endless money supply so he can throw money at problems and make them go away eventually. But his timelines are basically all lies used to get venture and retail money into the game.

I haven't read the article, but what if:

The problems arrizing from alzheimers are so problematic, that the cabdrivers / ambulance drivers drive themselves to death before they enter the stats as alzheimers patients?

A bit like the famous bullet holes in planes from ww2

Nobody is turning off ad blockers.

Thats funny. I have a mx master 3 and its handsdown the best workmouse i have ever had. I work in strange places and the mouse works on every surface. Even glass, mirrors, server doors, skin, pants. I hate the app with a passion and use BTT.

I agree. Helix is more like ruby on rails.

I will try ki editor

Is the government contract 200m per year? Or for a longer period?

Its called corporatism and is a part of classical fascism.

I laughed. No in europe when you win a case like this the judge usually forces the losing party to pay the legal expenses of the winner. Especially if the losing party is a big corporation.

Exactly. And also just ban AI. Its a lose lose scenario if it turns out to be true.

I feel this is wrong. Especially the dont try to save the world part.

You should enjoy the simple things. As Emma Goldman once said: a revolution without dancing is not one worth fighting for. But she did not mean the procedural ceremonial dances as we haven seen at protests by liberals, she meant that life should still have fun things or else the tiranny after the revolution will be similar or worse.

If the cintrini report is true, one of the only good ways to solve this crisis would be a butlerian jihad. It would be necessary to destroy all autonomous agents and ban them.

With good, i mean a way that is good for the most of mankind. If everyone is not trying to save the world this jihad will not happen.

This reaction feels like an llm wrote it

that is true. They would have failed after their first failed launch. The US government saved them.

yes, I think it's because HN users think that politics are comparable to systems design, and its not. Politics is very complex and a lot of non-rational things are done and rationalized later.

It's not about the Iranian government killing its own. Then we should have seen a lot more interventions. It's about oil and regional power. The US wants that the region is in hands of their allies and Iran threatens this.

Probably the worst example, because Japan was probably going to surrender anyways.

dont forget who is writing it and what he needs to think about it and what he wants others to think about it...

checked out your comments. Dont need to know more

edit: this was for frumple.

I dont know what murder people are referring to, but if its Alex Pretti, I would like to point you to the analysis by Bellingcat, currently posted on reddit. Its clearly a murderous execution of a man that is on his hands and feet. You will not let me choose lies above my own eyes.

Firing a gay person is still considered moral by probably most people in this world. If not for the insufferable joy they always seem to bring to the workplace! How dare they distract the workers with their fun! You are saying morality does not exist in the universe because people have different moralities. That is like saying attracting forces dont exist because you have magnetism and gravitational pull(debatable) and van der waals forces etc. Having moral frameworks for societies seems to be a recurring thing. You might even say: a prerequisite for a society. I love to philosophize about these things but trying to say it doesnt exist because you cant scientifically prove it is laying to much belief in the idea that science can prove everything. Which it demonstrably cannot.

I have in fact seen a lot of the world, so booyaka? Lived in multiple continents for multiple years.

There is evidence for genetic moral foundations in humans. Adopted twin studies show 30-60% of variability in political preference is genetically attributable. Things like openness and a preference for pureness are the kind of vectors that were proposed.

Most animals prefer not to hurt their own, prefer no incest etc.

I like your adversarial style of argumenting this, it's funny, but you try to reduce everything to repeatable science experiments and let me teach you something: There are many, many things that can never ever be scientifically proven with an experiment. They are fundamentally unprovable. Which doesnt mean they dont exist. Godels incompleteness theorem literally proves that many things are not provable. Even in the realm of the everyday things I cannot prove that your experience of red is the same as mine. But you do seem to experience it. I cannot prove that you find a sunset aesthetically pleasing. Many things in the past have left nothing to scientifically prove it happened, yet they happened. Moral correctness cannot be scientifically proven. Science itself is based on many unprovable assumptions: like that the universe is intelligible, that induction works best, that our observations correspond with reality correctly. Reality is much, much bigger than what science can prove.

I dont have a god, but your god seems to be science. I like science, it gives some handles to understand the world, but when talking about things science cannot prove I think relying on it too much blocks wisdom.

I disagree, this we don't know. You treat life as if persistence is it's overarching quality, but rocks also persist and a rock that keeps persisting through time has nothing that resembles wanting. I could be a bit pedantic and say that life doesnt want to keep existing but genes do.

But what I really want to say is that wanting to live is a prerequisite to the evolutionary proces where not wanting to live is a self filtering causality. When we have this discussion the word wanting should be correctly defined or else we risk sitting on our own islands.

@margalabargala: You are correct, hence the meaninglessness of the OP. The universe could care like humans make laws to save that ant colony that makes nice nests. the ants dont know humans care about them and even made laws that protect then. But it did save them from iradication. They feel great cause they are not aware of the highway that was planned over their nest (hitchhikers reference).

You dont know this, this is just as provable as saying the universe cares deeply for what we do and is very invested in us.

The universe has rules, rules ask for optimums, optimums can be described as ethics.

Life is a concept in this universe, we are of this universe.

Good and bad are not really inventions per se. You describe them as optional, invented by humans, yet all tribes and civilisations have a form of morality, of "goodness" of "badness", who is to say they are not engrained into the neurons that make us human? There is much evidence to support this. For example the leftist/rightist divide seems to have some genetic components.

Anyway, not saying you are definitely wrong, just saying that what you believe is not based on facts, although it might feel like that.

all rights are provided by a state or hegemon. Some rights are harder to take away than others. Some are easier. the hegemon does not need to be defined.

True for most countries except israel, Israel has killed american soldiers even. From the very beginning of their state. Look up the USS Liberty incident. They bombed the warship with mirages to make sure their cold blooded murder of an arab coastal village wouldnt be investigated.

dont have imessage and dont wanna use it, but can you ask when he thinks the files will be released? gotta ask

this is not true, this is the basis for housing speculation. Holding vacant overpriced houses until they sell. Its not a loss until you close the sale.

So if I understand it correctly, its basically a system where AI gets a persistent internal memory? and authentication works on another layer and everything is wrapped in a sci-fi story-system? Is it because other tools always give dashboards that dont actually make a lot of sense, just "feel logical" but dont really give a lot of usefull context?

the name fits the post. I have a different take on "nothing to hide" I think it's a shame that you have nothing to hide. Interesting minds have things to hide. It can be new ideas that are revolutionary and need hidden work to develop into a strong idea. It can be things that challenge the status quo in a dangerous way (for the status quo). It might be gaining freedom from stifling sexual norms. It could be information about your status (rich or poor). If you have nothing to hide, please walk around naked. Never close your curtains. Carry a screen with all your assets and bank accounts. Please carry all your passwords in plain text in your pocket or tattooed on your arm. Keep your address visible on a post-it note on your forehead.

Its just absurd to think you have nothing to hide. If it's not from the state, then it is from other people that mean you harm. That will take advantage of the information you are broadcasting.

Are you saying that anonymity is bad because there are trump supporters that like anonymity?

Or are you saying that anonymity is not "cool" because radical left-wingers like it and that lets rightwingers do it as well?

Are you saying that advocating for anonymity is not nice because terrorists (who? I dont know many of them) will spit on you (do terrorists do that? does that make someone a terrorist?) and bomb not only you but you family and friends and not read my manifesto on anonymity, while insinuating that the only reason anybody wants anonymity is because they want to watch freaky "crap"?

Pardon, my french, but you sound like a troll from some intelligence agency. It just doesnt make a lot of sense.