Trurl

Well the video highlighted the mission would highlight that women and minorities lead the mission. Which is ok. I am just poking fun of the fact that it is costing a 100 billion dollars. This mission is way behind. If we were on the moon in 1970’s why is it so hard to go back? Yes I know these women are good astronauts. Putting someone on the moon is great, but if you say first woman on the moon, $100,000,000,000. Eliminating the need for DEI, priceless.

Well I am just making joke. I know there are highly qualified women. They can out perform me. But while touring Kennedy Space Center there were videos about a manned moon mission. It said it would put the first woman on the moon. Which is a good achievement. But why does Artemis moon mission cost a trillion dollars?

Why do you keep saying I am for invading Greenland when I say it is a bad idea? It is better strategy to gain allies than to occupy countries. isn’t that the art of war book. It is easy to conquer but it is useless if you can’t control. In other word you can destroy a country, but all the people will be against you. Michio Kaku is my favorite scientist not Elon. Michio turned down a job to develop weapons to teach. He also is a U.S. Army Vet. He was drafted in the Vietnam era. He gives account of a demonstration of weapons that would obliterate the enemy. But at the same time he realized the weapons wouldn’t win the war. I did not know of the military base in Greenland. We probably just want to drill baby drill. But I am joking when I say that. I don’t want to conquer Greenland or drill there. But if we did conquer Greenland, imagine how much waste in their government we could eliminate. This would eliminate debt and improve the overall efficiency.

No I am not for conquering more countries. Just to be clear. I used We because I live in the U.S. It would be different if Greenland allowed us to build military bases there. I have seen rumors on the internet that Russia was building bases in the North Pole. But that is just internet propaganda. I support the U.S. military but why do we need a missile defense unless we plan on pissing off the rest of the world. Space is next for military bases. I’m just glad every country gets along on the International Space Station.

Russia takes Ukraine. China takes Taiwan. We get Greenland. Trump brought this up in his message to Congress. If you listen closely he said we need it and we’re going to get it one way. This is a recipe for war. You can’t accuse Russia in Ukraine than do the same. What if the Ukraine peace deal is to split Ukraine between the U.S. and Russia?

I watched a video of Edward Frenkel. He was Jewish and didn’t know it. They tested him for the Moscow University. But his test was more advanced. So whoever sets the standards must be just and the evaluator must be fair. If you are taking a higher level exam in maths, physical chemistry or biology then there is very little that is subjective in the assessment taking place. Your answers are either right or wrong. Yes put the test creator determines the difficulty. Some professors design the tests so a portion of students fail. It was discrimination in Frenkel’s case. But is this always necessary? Are people failing because they don’t meet the standard or do the standards set them to fail? Again we need standards. But how can you be sure standards of merit are right? Standards are hard to set.

Has anyone looked at this. I am saying the smaller Prime factor is between 1.0 * 10^90 and 1.0 * 10^130. I know that is a large amount of numbers. Does it make it more solvable? If you already knew the range how did you solve for it? If you already knew that it was in this range it isn’t useful. But if it is useful it could be a way to find meaning in random polynomials.

Yes the difficulty in assessment. Merit based is still subjective as Ten Oz states with the sports example. I know we have to have standards but as with the sports example you still don’t get perfect results. Yes, we need standards. The standards protect the student from corrupt assessments. Standards can also also be used to discriminate. That is where DEI is to protect. However some believe DEI is against evaluation on merit. I am just noting standards of merit is subjective. If you are below standards you fail. If you are above standards evaluators we seek to utilize you. Which could be good or bad. My question to you guys is what is a fair standard? Most are easy. But so much of success is determined by the evaluation of the examiner.

Who said any process is fair. Try getting into the union without knowing someone. I would say if everything was based on merit DEI is unnecessary. I mean merit should be the best way; the most unbiased way to get a random sample you science guys are always looking for. A letter grade of A over C should be independent of race, income, religion. When I applied for college the process seemed fair, although I only know my own case. But I blame the psychologists always labeling, classifying, and categorizing. I mean people are very similar and the education system always has a way to classify them. If we ignore race and gender is a classification on “Merit” still fair? What is merit. And why is it I am based on how fast I run 2 miles, shoot 70%, or get a perfect spelling test? It shows aptitude and motivation. But at the same time it qualifies or disqualifies me. Can’t we work and learn without metrics? I have seen plenty of women with better metrics than me. But as with Artemis space mission, I wouldn’t spend a trillion dollars to put her on the moon just because of DEI😜

I don’t think the exchange matters much. How many times in your life were you in a disagreement and changed your mind or approach? Trump is right Zelensky has no cards to play. There needs to be a strategy. I have stated on previous posts that I do not like this war. I feel for Ukraine, but we give them weapons when there is no chance for them to win. A military operation will not solve this war. It will start a war. Zelensky will have to concede. I don’t know what Russia wants. But diplomacy is more powerful than war.

Some people drive FORDs: fix or repair daily. I drive a DODGE and didn’t know what it stood for until DOGE: Department Of Destroying Government Efficiency. I see this as government trying to control the departments that support it. It is trying to save money that is going to be spent anyway just not on the things Musk sees as waste. They are saying we will save money by spending less. And it sounds logical. But there is a problem: how do you define waste? I don’t like this massive job cutting but I don’t know enough about business and economics to weigh in. I don’t think it’s about truth as much as opinions and feelings. We don’t always know the truth. We go by what we feel is the truth. This is why we can’t agree on political issues. Does it make sense to buy Twitter for 40 billion and save 30 million by cutting the people who make it run jobs? Is it just a creation cycle where Twitter already is established and it is time to move to other projects? I don’t like billionaires controlling the world. But they are responsible for creating a system the economies rely upon. Bernie Sanders gave a speech standing up to the new administration. I liked it and agreed 10 billionaires shouldn’t have more money than the entire bottom half of people combined. But could Bernie create an alternative system that would fit everyone’s needs. What would be fair? How would we employ and feed everyone? I’m not saying Elon is right. We need to keep him in check. That is why we fight over issues. A difference in opinion is good. It makes us think about our decisions.

No, I am saying that he could be a brilliant scientist working to improve the world, but every time he is on the web or tv he represents himself as an idiot. This is why I can’t form an opinion. You know fake news. As I said before if he is doing wrong why hasn’t anyone tried to stop him. Democrats say he doesn’t have the power to fire federal workers and funds congress approved. Then act by righting a new law that isn’t passed. They are senators. I believe they could stop Elon if they wanted. That is what disappoints me. They say things like this goes against rights and we go and do it anyhow. They claim Trump’s policies will reck us, but again we do it anyhow. I think a lot of politicians’ debate and opinions are just for show.

Well you guys are either under estimate him or you don’t like the idea of someone who fits the profile of the perfect and successful scientist act like a jerk and wreck the political structures of the world. That is what troubles me. You want Einstein’s genius with a great world view and personality. Instead you get Elon.

Well he may or may not be a genius. Genius is has to be shown. Like or dislike him he is brilliant. I know some of you have said it is the people who work below him. But organizing these businesses is some accomplishment. We may not know what his endgame is but good or bad he is going after his goals. We don’t like it, but we have to admit it is a brilliant way to screw us. I’m not familiar with Elon being a nazi. The U.S. did have true nazis in the space program. They knew rocket science. I don’t know the complete history. So I don’t know about the legal process for their work. After WWII the Soviet Union also competed for German scientists. I think Elon is an asset to the United States. Remember if him and Trump fail we have a new administration in 4 years. The democrats act like there is nothing they can do. Bring a lawsuit. But democrats are just a vicious as republicans. I think they can handle Elon.

I don’t know either way. Sometimes we base things on sort of myths we piece together. Musk’s perceived personality is conflicting accounts. I think he did make important contributions to SpaceX, Tesla. I think he is a genius. But genius doesn’t equal personality. He is following the standard book of a mad scientist in that he wants control. So he decides who has a job. Again this proves he is a genius. He convinced everyone this saves money and prosperity. He claims it will improve the economy and lower the deficit. But it makes perfect sense to have a genius in charge of the economy, government, and people’s lives. What could go wrong?

He is just a man. But what is it you like or dislike about him? Whatever your opinion, give the example of what he did.

Well again I was agreeing with you. I was just was stating what the podcast said. It takes at least 3 months to complete the study. I am unfamiliar in these processes. But I think it had something to do with the window to reach Mars. But remember anything to do with space is inherently dangerous. The day Challenger launched it had 6ft ice sickles on it. Red tape is real. If you ever dealt with it, as you probably have. But you don’t destroy the entire agency. Many times I waited for months as my file sat on a desk. It needed a signature that would take 5 minutes only to sit on another desk for another 5 minute signature. It was like the government agency did this on purpose. So I understand why deregulation is backed. But you don’t destroy the entire agency. I mean you don’t cancel aid to starving kids to get revenge on the regulations we are all subject to.

You’re right he is just testing the waters. It will lead to the agency he really doesn’t want. Or even the threat of dismantlement would influence agencies.

Well I still don’t understand his motivation. I don’t know economics but I don’t think cutting funds in the millions could “directly” transfer for his use. You may actually lose more money by creating new problems. Wouldn’t Trump fund his space projects anyway? What are you guys conspiracy theories? What is Elon’s motive? He could have all the funding he wants without “cutting waste.” Why dismantle the government agencies? If the money benefited him I understand. Cutting programs doesn’t solve his legal problems, does it?

I am agreeing with you. I all about stopping waste, but this isn’t the way to do it. These programs took years to establish. No one knows the criteria for identifying waste. When you take out the FDA, you are just paving the way for eliminating the Affordable Care Act. He knows how to put projects together. I don’t think things like Space X would be there without him. But I don’t think he is motivated by money. To me it doesn’t make sense he is dealing in government affairs and saving money. I thought he would be totally focused on Mars. The following is just my figuring but trashing a government program doesn’t save money. It wastes all the effort put in the program. People lose aid. It doesn’t get rid of the need. And you can’t just replace the program. I heard the following on an Elon Musk podcast on Audible. Elon needed to launch at a certain date, but was told he had to complete a 3 month FAA study; something to do with using the air space for launch. Now eliminating such a bureaucratic policy makes sense. That is waste. I like Elon Musk the guy who saved the US space program. I don’t think he should be trashing government programs. i know what people think. “He made rockets for a fraction of the cost of the trillion dollar NASA rockets that are never built, imagine what he could do with the government.“

Well I am joining this topic late after reading the previous posts. But I think science is going to improve in the current administration. The problem is science is going to advance but at what cost. Not of money, because if the science is not profitable it will be trashed. If better means faster spacecraft or more powerful weapons we will be better. I’m impressed by Elon Musk’s accomplishments. He gets things done but not without making the people working for him miserable. I write this description of him based on his biography. I’m not an academic but cutting $37 million from a few thousand researcher and planning a trillion AI doesn’t add up. The question is how long before he cuts a program you use? We will have to see how this plays out. Trump knows we need research. And Elon’s Twitter experiment is still going on. I just wished we knew how it turned out before we used it to eliminate waste in government.

Remember I am not for getting rid of teachers. The ai does not have to teach to ruin higher education. All it has to do is ruin the discipline you teach. I use to write as a hobby. It is hard enough to get things seen in the sea of the internet let alone competing with ai. Then to add insult to injury the machine learns (copies) what you create and now can write if it was you. Prorammers are next. Sure it can help with code compatibility, but if this thing recognizes patterns it is in control of the code. It will be able to see things we don’t. And finally mathematics. It may not design and create math as well as humans, but it will have obscure facts, especially in statistics, about the average time the play clock moved before each team snapped the ball in the Super Bowl. Know matter if it is brilliant or crap 💩 it risks the chance of ruining disciplines. I know it isn’t all bad. The processing could help use find cures or inventions. What I am saying is nothing new. You would better understand my position if you read “The Cyberaid.” The most important thing teachers can supply is in person instruction. Machines can’t do this. But I have had classes where you are left to figure the project from instructions and the instructor input is only to tell you what you did wrong. No resubmission. They just grade it. Couldn’t an ai do the same?

Scientifically we cannot describe “nothing.” But what if nothing described something that didn’t exist yet? Take your own life before your cells existed. A few seconds earlier it wouldn’t be you it would be a different person. So you are nothing because you didn’t exist and under different conditions may not have existed. So before you existed you viewed of the universe was nothing. Would it be the same for the universe?

I don’t know the true capabilities of AI. You could argue it isn’t thinking. But its ability to find patterns (Some that we don’t even understand.) is remarkable. But even if our thoughts are more advanced, more creative it doesn’t matter. Take board games we might perform better on D&D, but anything that has a logical pattern the AI will dominate. Say this thing learns statistics and game theory. Even without it the pattern recognition and speed of processing mimics how we think and is beyond our abilities. I saw a YouTube video with a computer machine learning Super Mario Brothers that did nothing for weeks but little by little played the game. Well I am for education and teachers. However while you could say teachers design curriculum an AI can train on it. I heard somewhere AI was training on Khan Academy. You can’t replace the instruction and feedback of a teacher, but a self study or preparing for a licensing exam would be perfect for AI. Even if you feel like AI can’t do your job, it can still train and spit out junk that works good enough to substitute in your place. Bottom line I don’t like it. It’s not the computer’s fault. Someone is trying to make money ripping (training) on others content. And I think the 500 billion AI initiative would by better spent on space and other projects.

Well I used that example because your job is next. I believe any creative endeavor will as you guys say “change” will be less valuable. Do you think AI can’t teach? It can summarize the notes and provide reading. College is mostly self studying. So if the AI wrote the test from the curriculum not only could it make custom tests, it could add a time limit and proctor the exam. I understand it will change the way students study. That doesn’t worry me. I use art as the example that if you paint a picture then the AI copies it and draws a thousand more variations is your painting still special?