Otto Kretschmer

I myself possess the aforementioned traits (my intellectual curiosity is probably in the top 1% of the population). I wouldn't oppose my tuture wife/partner possessing them as well. In fact, this would be the optimal kind of partner for me, I doubt I'd have much to talk about with an aintelectually average person.

I mean raising kids to have high Openness to Experience, one of the Big Five personality traits. It includes several traits: intellectual curiosity, aesthetics, fantasy, adventurousness, feelings, values. In other words, children who, when they become adults, constantly self-educate (out of genuine curiosity), can have deep discussions about the theory of evolution, macroeconomics and political theory alike, have good imagination, appreciate art and beauty, are open to new and unconventional value systems etc. The crucial period is childhood and adolescence when neuroplasticity is much higher than in an adult. The crucial point is that the upbringing cannot be forceful. Forcing a child/teen to do anything will most likely backfire when they get older. It's also morally wrong for me, my parents never forced me to do anything and I cannot imagine forcing my future kids either

The Chinese used to have a similar idea during the Shang dynasty with the supreme god being the Shangdi but later the Zhou conquered China and repalced him with a more impersonal idea of Heaven.

Like I said, I am not an AI expert or even a major AI buff, just a regular user unfortunately. :( I would recommend asking on Reddit in some AI or tech-related subreddits.

On the benchmark I use (Livebench) it scores marginally higher than Gemini 2.5 Pro, mostly slightly higher on reasoning (97 vs 94) and math. It's equal on everything else.

It's an AI architecture that will likely replace the currently dominant transformer architecture within a few years. The "symbolic" part of it (usage of knowledge graphs, logic rules etc.) allows neurosymbolic AI to derive the same knowledge from drastically fewer examples. As an example - in order to learn what a cat is, regular neural networks need to be given tens of thousands of cat photos - if the training data only includes cats that are indoors, the model will struggle to recognize a cat in a forest, a city etc. since it learns correlation, not the underlying concept.Neurosymbolic AI does not have this problem because it can learn what "catness" is about from just a handful of pictures or even a single one. When teaching neurosymbolic AI to stop at red, you no longer need to show it dozens of hours of cars stopping at red lights in every possible weather and lightning conditions - it's enough to show it a single video and it'll derive the general rule. The neural part handles perception ("That's a traffic light," "The color is red"). The symbolic part has a hard-coded rule: IF object_is_traffic_light AND color_is_red THEN initiate_stop(). The model doesn't need to learn this core traffic law from data; it's given as a fact. It only needs enough data to learn to recognize the objects reliably. It's creativity is also going to be higher since the AI will no longer have the need for every possible outcome to be included in the training data in order to know it. This is a rather basic answer and I guess an AI enthusiast more knowledgeable than I could provide a more detailed answer.

Wait for neurosymbolic AI guys.

The Old Testament God clearly resembles a Bronze Age chieftain - he is violent, whimsical and doesn't tolerate criticism. He's clearly modeled after humans, not the other way around.

The Far Right crowd is extremely intolerant of trans people so it would make an order of magnitude more sense for him to start supporting Bernie and AOC.

The Silicon Valley has always been a reactionary, anti-egalitarian hellhole (see" "The Californian Ideology" by Richard Barbrook and Andy Cameron, released in the 1990s") so his son's transition most likely has nothing to do with his politics. Sorry for quoting a months old post BTW.

Thanks! +1

Here you can post all questions and answers generated for you by AI. Model: Gemini 2.5 Pro 06-05, Google AI Studio. Prompt: "Create an esoteric programming language that makes even a simple program look like a secret document from X-Files".

To elaborate on what you've just written - class struggle is far from an abstract term. It results from the very nature of capitalism - in order to extract surplus value (needed for the next capital cycle) the capitalists need to pay their workers less than the total value of the goods/services their produce. This creates a conflict with workers who want to keep as much of that value for themselves as possible. Thus, no true centre-left "compromise" between labor and capital will ever be possible.

The oft cited figure is that 50% of personality is due to genetics and 50% due to environment - but this is the number for society as a whole. Individuals can vary. By personality I mean the Big Five personality traits which is the personality model with the most empirical backing as of now.

Which part of my previous reply is a "sermon" and what precisely do you disagree with?

Social Democracy (which is what most people mean by "left wing" or "progressive" politics) is a symptomatic treatment. It elimiantes the symptoms of unequality to some degree but not the root causes - the capitalists still posess massive material advantage over the working class and (even more crucially), their material interests are still opposite to material interests of the workers. So even if Social Democracy can bring benefits in the short term, in the long term the capitalists will do everything they can to undermine it and roll back all the elaborate social safety nets - for the US bourgeoisie even Keynesism was too much to swallow. Thus, the working class would constantly need to fight for the things they already have. Not to mention the fact that the whole western "welfare state" is enabled by massive exploitation of labor and natural resources in the Global South (the Unequal Exchange).

Sometimes one cannot expect things to work right away or work on the first try - US constitution (with all it's amazing personal liberties) was adopted in 1787 and the US did not even have universal male suffrage until 1867 and women's suffrage until 1919. That is longer than the existence of the USSR. And even western historians admit that the October Revolution was a major reason why things like the New Deal and European Social Democracy came into power.

The future is unknown as they say. 😼 If you rolled the clock back to 1875 AD USA (150 years ago), the fruits of liberal democracy wouldn't exactly make you smile - wealth inequality that would make today's US blush with envy, majority of the population working 12 hours per day for poverty wages, no pensions, public healthcare, sick leaves or vacations, minimal workplace safety regulations, child labor. Women with no right to vote, pursue higher education and with few employment opportunities. Private companies running their own towns and Pinkertons dispersing labor demonstrations. And that was at a time when US had already been a democracy for 100 years and UK for 200.

Another crucial difference is that all Fascism is reactionary, i.e. it attempts to not just freeze the socioeconomic order that exists, but to actually roll it back to an earlier stage... you know, those good ol' days when men were real men, women knew their real place and so on. It's difficult to claim popular mandate when Olaf Scholz had an approval rating of 15% with the entire German government hovering around 25%. The issue is that even in liberal democracies, the government almost never represents some abstract people - very rarely does any party get above 45% of votes and usually it's significantly less. In order to form a government, parties need to form coalitions and the resulting compromise-based program usually ends up having less support than even the 50% of votes it supposedly represents.

Communism has nothing to do with Fascism. They aim to achieve completely different goals (a highly egalitarian society versus an extremely elitist one) and they have completely different philosophical underpinnings. You're conflating Fascism with authoritarianism/one party rule which you shouldn't be doing (the phrase "left wing Fascist" comes from this misunderstanding of Fascism)

The right wing government in my country (Poland) that was in power 2015-23:banned abortion and several women died because of this. It also stopped funding IVF which resulted in 50,000 fewer children being born.

What time was that? Speaking as a Marxist, other than Stalin's suppression of genetics and promotion of Lamarckism, I don't find any examples of the left being terribly irrational. Perhaps I don't know enough despite being a history buff. :)

Scientists and left wing people both score high on Openness to Experience, one of the dimensions in the Big Five personality model (the personality model with scientific backing behind it, unlike the crap MBTI). The smae personality tendencies that make people more likely to be interested in science also make them more likely to be open to new/alternative value systems.

@exchemist This subforum is for discussing religion. There is no practical difference between discussing Biblical literalism and discussing other aspects of religion.

The story of Noah's Ark says that Noah took either 2 or 7 of each kind of animal in the world on the ark. Even when we don't take the utter logistical absurdity of such an endevour, that's not the end of the problem. The story states that animals were on the ark. This means vertebrates and invertebrates - yet in our ecosystem there are also plants, fungi bacteria and viruses - and a few others. How do literalists explain this? Did Noah also have a massive seed bank on the Ark and petri dishes with smallpox and bubonic plague?