dimreepr

OF course it is, bc we're not discussing relativity and the reality of light; we're discussing a very different kind of light.

Well my reality is probably a bit sadder than yours ATM, but how do we define by how much?

Who's?

But not in this context, for instance, "Brave new world" objectively, is a bloody good idea bc everyone is happy.

Perhaps that should start with you.

Fuel contanimation, an acceptable excuse to blame it on god rather than pay out on the bet...

It turns out that predicting a civil war is possible (so science) and it has a lot to do with who holds the purse strings. The Ted talk I linked, does a much better job of explianing why...

Just another perspective... It's the people who pay for protection, that inspires a war... IOW, what am I free to express, without a barrage of negs, that have no context or explanation???

Indeed my apologies, I could have sworn that my sentence ended with "for some people", it's what I intended to write. It was my perspective, but then I've never had to fight to protect him. My apologies to all who found my words objectionable, and I'm not trying to Present the English solution as somehow better; for them every slave was pure profit; they didn't care if they lived or died, as long as they couldn't escape then enough of them survived, to pay for the trip + fund's for the next trip + bonus, many steps down the moral ladder than anything America could claim; in the end we had made enough, before the noise of moral objection came into focus, America didn't have that luxury. Civil War, 1861-1865 | Slavery, Abolition, Emancipation and Freedom - CURIOSity Digital Collections (harvard.edu)

but who cares.. MY dad died the day after yeterday...

Indeed, but there's a lot of context missing in your emphasis... We determine who we are by what we do. One day we might agree...

Google it. 😉

Assuming anything is the wrong place to start, if you want the truth. What would be the benefit of a computational model? For instance, would the joke be funnier? The computer say's "the joke is n% funnier, when humans listen to it in a group". What does that tell you about the joke?

When did I say that? https://www.battlefields.org/learn/articles/spectators-witness-history-manassas?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR2mX0QB0RqUupWigL0tXDlexICHoaD66FEusNY4bnyCaPSEvD-hlXBk-lM_aem_AdJUJwgueDkpOj0ewWkvrSsAp8nzczPoxZyFEPydu44kwthVDOBHoLa2xQRyMFpidMvLJLvn8GL7y_iCP72umPje#:~:text=Watching the Federal army advance seemed like the perfect Sunday afternoon diversion.&text=It is a popular%2C almost,battle of a short rebellion The view from that hill was such bc it didn't really affect them. I was listening to a debate a few weeks ago, in which the story of a runaway slave helped a northern general with an overwhelming army, corner and then refused to attack, letting them slip away, which happened time after time; some think it was bc of his trust/distrust of a negro, I wonder how his perspective was different? I'm sorry I can't remember the specifics or the source bc it was a tangent of the debate. Apologies @TheVat But this is well worth a listen and it's beyond me to summarise a summary.

From who's perspective?

For a start, the battles were considered a fine days entertainment, that seems to answer most of this; as for the rest of your question, it's a case of economic need; the south needed it's slaves/property, more than they needed a clean moral conscience, the north didn't. The English avoided the need for a battle, by paying compensation to the slave owner's; a debt BTW that lasted well into the 1990's.

The closest I can come to a formal definition is a 'joke', one form of intelligence makes a joke for another form of intelligence to laugh, if they don't laugh they're not cognisant of the intention, a computer won't ever laugh, however intelligent we make them.

Australian magpies are known for there swooping behaviour which, on the face of it seems territorial, but they can be persuaded to leave some alone or to become a sought out target. They can also get our intentions wrong, one person tried to save a chick and failed and has been terrorised ever since by the parents. How close they are to our level of intelligence can never be known, bc we aren't capable of walking a mile in their shoes or suckers.

Why would they? It's nothing more than a meme, the standard big bang theory is, first there was nothing, which exploded... I suspect my point has been misunderstood, see how easy it is...

"Born to be wild" isn't for everyone... Kind of God like, in his chosen idiom...

You can but dream...🙏

Your overlords aren't going to invite you to dine on them. With them, maybe, but in a very different sence. 😉

Well I think they're icky...

Well at least they haven't waged war on us, yet... 😉

I think his point is, the octopus had it's reasons and the woman put her own interpretation on the event; in the parlance of a ghost denier, she was primed, she knew the octopoid show intelligence. It could be a simple as, "this is where I get fed by humans, so where is it bitch?". Absolutely, such hubris this is the test for self awareness "Harry, bring out the mirror and if they can't see it, they're either blind or stupid." Sorry I didn't read the second paragraph before my reply, kinda hammered it home though. 🙂