dimreepr

How many ghost stories would it take to make ghosts real? Some introverts just need validation to become more confident and some extroverts can become less confident with negative validation. Most people don't really fit into a pigeon hole... 😉

Indeed +1, but some times there's an attempt to weaponise the DV in defence of a specious argument... From member's that sould know better...

Some people have a strange relationship with pain, some even genuinely enjoy the sensation, their reward system maybe enhanced, rather than destroyed; it's possible such people would choose to stay and maybe even engage jollily with their torturer. 😉

Balance is the key...

If nothing dies, the cycle is broken...

Not really...

This is the question, at what point does a facsimile, resemble reality?

Nor did I...

Indeed, but no more useful...

The evolution of AI can be wrong, but it will get better...

I think there's yin-yang aspect to this question, the other side of the AI coin is, perhaps, a more acceptable version of 'soma' from 'a brave new world'. Most of us are perfectly content with an external source of validation, if it's roughly human shaped...

This is the reason, I think, that a written language degrades, in terms of understanding across cultures, both different cultures and generational cultural drift (evolution); whilst the spoken word remains understandable across generation's and culture's.

Philosophically speaking, you do fit a well known stereotype; typically, not long lived 'in these here part's'... 😉

I'll have to give it some thought, bc I seem to be missing something important...

I'll be honest, it struck me as a verbose version of the same metaphor. My understanding is, the second tick rate is invariant (my apologies if I've used that word incorrectly, but it seems appropriate), so whatever frame one is in, only seems distorted from the outside.

I get that it's unrepresentative at a certain level of understanding, but can you think of a better metaphor for those of us that don't speak maths fluently?

Then it's just your opinion and therefore has no value in the discussion, besides your conflating a cultural tendency/stereotype with an individual personality. 😉

Why?

Historically, gay behaviour just meant flamboyant. My point was, culture alone isn't enough to suppress a strong/extreme personality type; much like a strong willed sexual "deviant"... 😉

In cases like this, ethics is the acceptable face of a moral deviation; a very slippery slope... Indeed, who are we to demand the doctor's damage themselves, for us? "The risk Socrates himself faces is obvious but, as he explains it, the danger he faces is far less grave than the one the jurors may inflict upon themselves: Rest assured that if you kill me – since I am the person I say I am – you wouldn't harm me more than you harm yourselves."

History suggests not, a gay person will always shine through...

Besides, where else would we find useful soldier's (heroes)? The topic has a very "A Brave New World" type vibe...

Your natural bias, like everyone, sometimes blinds one to the truth; the wise among us, try to wake the rest of us up to the possibility that one's hero is just another person, that's as blind as we are. The Ubermenche is the guy that can pursuade us to say "meh" when we find out that David Bowie used an autotune... 😉

You could ask, what would the ubermensh do?

Human failure; and the enlightenment it may contain... What happens if I mistake a lie for a truth???