dimreepr

The value of the information is determined by the understander, for instance, when one understands the "bible", then one doesn't need a God; whilst, simultaneously, understanding why other people do need a God. The value of information is determined by the teacher... 😉 Nearly all of my teacher's were roughly humanoid looking...

It seems like we're in a sort of Heisenberg uncertainty principle with the question (bolded), we have to know where to start the calculation i.e. what is a smart human? Of course not, even the superhero 'Captain hindsight' isn't that powerful...

The thing is, all this happened on the Earth we all share and can observe relative to each other; all those other Earth's may well exist, but we can't perceive them. Hindsight is the only exact science, but we keep trying to use it to be more clairvoyant, which is a mistake however intriguing. 😉

Or has the traffic to this site significantly diminished since the change?

Dear Mr. president??? Hmm, seems a little sycophantic. If you really want to challenge him, ask him what he did last Thursday?

It's not just any question... 😁

This is more of a philosophy question, bc ATM AI is demonstrably stupid in terms of intelligence as we recognise it. Will it evolve to be better? Yes Will it evolve to be smarter? Yes, no and maybe. How will we know, if they break the glass ceiling and become a threat? Not before it's too late... 😉

Indeed, and neither are his followers, they're also a product of a limited education... And given Musk's Dad, so did he...

Hmm, I wonder if you'd say the same if you were one of them? Perhaps, the only difference is the accent of the story teller... 😉

Copy and paste does not an expert make. 😉 Besides you're not reading the room, society isn't ready for that. The current political economic situation (the free market) was created post-war to dig us out of a hole (which it achieved); but the polical pendulum always 'swing by' the solution. People find comfort in whatever situation they find themselves, however squalid the conditionss appears to other's, further up the chain; that's the fundamental problem with getting your idea off the ground, everyone higher in the chain would never swap with anyone below them, and they're affraid that everyone below them 'would litterally kill to swap place's'... Let's hope the historical pinch point coincides meaningfully with the climate pinch point...

We could, but microbiology prefers a more comfortable environment... 😉

Indeed, it had me scratching my head, it sound's to me like they're being business savy; much like when Trump claimed he was being smart to avoid tax. 😜

You should pitch that to Elon. I've been an active practitioner for nearly 20 years, I live in a caravan and my only energy use is a computer and a microwave, whatever the weather (luckily, I live in Gloucestershire), I work upto 5hrs a week @ £10 an hr, to cover all me needs. So, I think, most people would consider me to be a time-served expert, what would you like to know?

A good way to bank...

I think that's why history is so easily dismissed, by those that don't dare look; this time is different bc the metaphors aren't quite analogous... Not every monster turns out to be monstrous, some are just confused... But get lucky.😉

Indeed, you're proving my point, 'the economist' doesn't care about feeding people, bc they assume their fiscal insulation contains a calorific value. I'm not trying to claim anything, other than the obvious, stupidity clause included in it's mantra "eternal growth is desirable, let's not worry about the possible"...

Well, you're no fun...

Nope, I'm claiming that you don't understand how...

Indeed, I can't remember where I heard it, but a great analogy is, "it's like trying to drive a car, legally, with the only working indicator being the oil pressure gauge.".

No-one is insulated from every economic collapse...

What's better for humanity isn't the same as what's better for a human, so where did they meet? All I can think of is the local shop, that bans both, but they aren't keen on people having cosy chats without buying. Like I said it's kinda tongue in cheek, but stupid on an individual level is no different to better, in this context. Dorian Gray Thought similarly...

Indeed, "superior" was used in the video and was dismissed on similar grounds and it's the reason I toyed with putting this in the 'lounge' bc it's kinda tongue-in-cheek. But there is philosophical 'meat on the bones' (which is why I urged people to view the video), as in "better" for humans...

Indeed, we just have to agree that it's equally unlikely...

There's a clause that prohibits this, if it's obvious to the electorate; but that's open to the interpretation of the electorate... 😉 Do you not see the problem here? You quote something that's almost a century old, and demand that it's still relavent without providing a coherent argument as to why it's the same... It's only similar by the coincidence of convergent evolution... 😉 That depends on the level of detail, Wittgenstein is both right and wrong: when communicating with a lion, it's important to understand when it's hungry before we mutually attempt to solve the meaning of life...

He's a rather famous intellectual/individual... No, but that rather missed the point of both protagonists. For instance, dogs are far more intelligent than cats, from an anthropogenic POV.