qarl

> Pure math isn’t an economic activity

Um. There are applications of mathematics that have a practical effect on the world. Right? You've crossed a bridge before, have you not?

And what is your solution then - only certain people will be allowed to work on math? If I use a computer to solve a math problem I will be a criminal? The whole thing is profoundly wrong-headed.

> Its goal is to expand the frontier of human understanding

Yes, and it does that quite nicely.

> The AI generated proofs are barely comprehensible by mathematicians

My understanding is that if you ask an AI to explain it to you it's quite easy to follow. But apparently that solution is intolerable for some.

[flagged]

Yeah.

I love me some AI, but it also attracts the NFT crowd. It's a problem.

[flagged]

[flagged]

Are you worried about the degenerates polluting your bloodline, too?

It's not. I'm asking you seriously why you believe Elon couldn't have faked the demo.

I can see you want to create a firewall between Elon and Tesla but it's ridiculous. He calls the shots. He is famous for calling the shots.

[flagged]

[flagged]

[flagged]

Just pointing out that you're now being deflected by kindergarten chants.

How the mighty have fallen.

Drivers took over during test runs.

A test car crashed into a fence in Tesla's parking lot during filming.

The video was cut from multiple takes.

The route was hardcoded.

Yeah. Nazi Germany was really clean, too.

Gotta clean up those degenerates, amirite?

It's just that dehumanizing language sounds really Nazi.

It's a tell.

Don't forget the "The person in the driver's seat is only there for legal reasons."

[flagged]

"I don't like Elon, but..." and "I'm not a racist, but..."

No one is falling for it.

> where are the fabricated demos?

Why not even make it more specific? "Where are the demos where he had a fake flying car before"? No one's falling for that one either.

> Rationality is a myth. Humans are emotional creatures. But with that being said there isn’t anything less rational about believing court documents can be faked than to believe a YouTube video widely recorded and shared by official and legitimate sources is fake.

LOL. You're talking about a guy who lies all the time.

And he's killed how many people with his DOGE chainsaw?

What on earth causes someone to be a bootlicker for someone that horrible. It's mind blowing.

Sticks and stones, my dude. Sticks and stones.

[flagged]

> I humbly apologise.

OH! No need. I enjoyed explaining it to you.

It would seem we've filled the queue on the other thread. Allow me to respond to you here:

> is an assertion without supporting evidence

I’m sorry, I thought the evidence was obvious. Allow me to explain it to you: someone who has a history of lying has a significantly higher chance of lying again than someone who does not.

> You also construct your own straw man

Asking a question is not putting words in someone’s mouth - and it was resolved with his simple “No”.

> The insults

Oh my. Do you really want to go there after this sequence:

> you're moving from the territory of reasonable questions to moderately desperate conspiracy theory

> Your confusion is understandable given your own (excruciatingly obvious) motives.

> find the words to make yourself feel good when pressing 'reply'

> I humbly apologise. When I said you were confused, I only meant to state a fact, not cause you harm.

> These linguistic motte-and-bailey tricks are pure debate bro.

Motte-and-bailey? I have not retracted a single thing.

> hope of actually changing the other person's mind

HA! I realized that would be impossible quite a long time ago. Now it’s just a fun game to see how bloodied you get.

> doesn't mean

I didn't say it proved anything. But it raises the chances significantly. If this were a normal company, with a normal reputation, I wouldn't even raise the possibility. Given the situation - come on.

Surely you agree. Please tell me yes.

[flagged]

No need for insults, friend. It weakens your position.

But sure, if I actually need to, let me spell it out.

The statement: "He is a liar" is stronger than the statement "He is a liar who sometimes tells the truth", despite the fact that the second is more detailed. Extraneous details distract from the main argument. Also - there is almost no example in the world of someone who makes only false statements. It's a ridiculous insertion.

I hope you can understand why your suggestion above is nonsensical.

Dude - you're the guy who called me delusional earlier.

I have no idea what your game is now - but I'm not playing.

[flagged]

> when exactly

The moment his criminal shield is removed from power.

Watch.

[flagged]

[flagged]