geordief

Groundhog day.Does anyone make any money?

There is that, as well (I mean I think you are right) The macro object that we are "sending back" has only existed as such for an infinitesimally short period of spacetime . "It" has no time to return to in the past where it had the same configuration.

If an object travelled back in time wouldn't every part of it have to follow it on its journey? There are so many components of any one object that it might take longer than the age of this ,or multiple universes for that to happen. If the object arrived at the point in spacetime it had been at before minus one component it could not be said to have travelled back in time If just one component did manage to make the journey then that would be a quantum object and I wonder whether that would cause a problem ? Would it be a case of "they all rolled over and one fell out,there was nine in the bed and the little one said....."?

Off topic,perhaps but can you try to give a short idea of the lines along which the debate is polarized in other settings**? Is it along the lines of whether a moratorium is called for? Or are there major discussions and differing approaches in other areas? **I have just listened to a bit of commentary on a few tv stations,that is all.

Can we weight the entries in the database in terms of factual reliability(and enforce that standard by law) I mean ,does CHATGPT just gobble up "information" provided by serial murderers and normal Joe Soaps equally permissively?

So is there a way of addressing this failing without banning them entirely? That seems a Quichote-esque avenue as the djinni is out of the bottle.

Are there going to be different regional and vested interest versions of CHATGPT? Will different proponents rely on different databases to skew the output in their favour? Will they try to spam the databases if their rivals ? Is there any way to weed out factual falsehoods from a database by fact checking "entries"? Should contributors to the database have a right to have their "entries" expunged? Is the "social network on steroids" nature of this new tool going to force existing content publishers on the internet to face up to their responsibilities to moderate content in the same way that print has been ,even if ineffectively (hello Mr Murdoch ) up till now?

Because we have learned to generalize? If my brother slept with my wife then so might his best friend or my other brothers.

Suppose you had a brilliant film director. Do you suppose he or she could make a film of consequence if all he had to work with was "brain dead" actors -interpreters of his and the author's work who brought absolutely nothing to the table and had to be led by the nose in the characters they portrayed?

It is not bad,but I am not a great reader and not a "fine judge" I 'd say it would sell copy.

It is wrong to mock the afflicted but it seems to me that De Santis bears a physical similarity to Micky Mouse. Trump has attacked him for having been bested by a mouse but perhaps it was a fair contest and he was just wrong footed by the genuine article?

Blew his finger off? Was that the school for hard knocks?

Yes,not their finest hour.What about Trump and his lawyer?

He has let it be known that he is happy to part with Harry if that will break the deadlock.

"Moderated" by Don Lemon if he accepted.

Could we have a subforum populated by a few choice and well known(in real or deceased lives) ai chatbots where we can feed them topical questions and watch the interplay between the opposing databases? Maybe fans of philosophy might enjoy "discussions" between Hitler and Marx (or John Lennon and Groucho) Henry 8 and the Pope?

I was reading that to have more than one case on the go makes life more difficult for the defense lawyers. The defendant has to show his or her hand in the earlier cases whereas the prosecution in the later cases start from scratch and with the benefit of the earlier disclosures. It would have to be heard before the election because he would have the tools as a sitting president to prevent it being heard ever(or set up some kind of packed court to hear it in his favour) We have his "president for life" comments to support this.

Suppose I want to be the king of posters.Can I use this Chatbot technology to put this forum's public archives into the database along with the post I want to answer and get an instant ,informed response to said post? If I struggle to get a "fair hearing" as per my point of view can I use this technology as an intellectual crutch? We all know how many users pass through these and similar forums and end up getting suspended.Will those users sopn be able to get this help to stay within the rules while not observing the spirit of a discussion forum?

Yes it is certainly very interesting.Not sure if it will compete with the Paltrow trial as pure spectacle but even this first part of his hoped for comeuppance is a lot more consequential than that. I do have sympathy for Cohen even if I wouldn't want to be his friend. He has ,in my view the higher moral ground for having served his time. There is that fascinating subplot to untangle the two guilts. Hopefully even the Trump cultists will be drawn in by the opening of the curtains.

We have seen the "rules" Trump and his cronies play by.You need a bit of balls to stay standing.

Mine has improved after my inguinal hernia was operated on.I also drink coffee during the day to keep the day/night rhythm of urination Also kegels, which have to be done correctly. Never heard of zinc being used.Sounds like that may be for general prostate health?

I read speculation that Weisenberg has now got his own lawyers and that it might be of consequence That might be more fun than is decent.

I mean there needs to be evidence besides Cohen's testimony and common sense. Cohen's credibility is a weak link and I have no idea how common sense will play out. Cohen was "crowing"** how his testimony has be corroborated by documents and has not been rebutted by any if the other witnesses so maybe that will tell. **not crowing but very passionate nonetheless How do you know that?

From the CNN discussion ,regarding the Stormy Daniels hush money aspect ,the test will be whether Trump personally knew about the cooking of the books and that the actual payments being made to her may not be central to a successful prosecution I also drew from their discussion that Michael Cohen may certainly be a weak link as his animosity to Trump was so obvious and on show(I thought he was very impressive,but still..) Recommend seeing his interview with Lemon and the other lady as it is great and instructive viewing.

Very interesting.A former president who may not be above the law and a Republican party that is beneath contempt.(actually Stormy Daniels considered running for a Republican seat in the Senate in 2010)