That honestly seems pretty low for friend.com

Although the fact they’re developing hardware on less than a million dollar budget is bananas, let alone the other whack ideas

He’d probably do something similar on day 1 while at the same time starting to recuperate the action politically, and after a few days just go into full conspiracy or similar mode

And DNS issues

I remember seeing a hypothesis that ADHD would have been beneficial in Hunter-gathering, as you would more quickly move from plant to plant rather than fully depleting a resource. It was just one study where they had a sort of game/simulation to test it though, so very early days on that theory.

As long as they don’t start building tunnels under their house because they’re an ‘engineer’…

Peer-reviewed NYT op-Eds (/s)

Which makes water lava, technically speaking

And to add a platitude: “Any idiot can build a bridge that stands, but it takes an engineer to build a bridge that barely stands.”

Or just let people wear what they want ffs

That’s not quite true: https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-corporations-obligations-to-shareholders/corporations-dont-have-to-maximize-profits

But to build on your analogy: we don’t make regulations based on a religious doctrine anymore in most countries. If your religion says no one is allowed to wear mixed fabrics or eat pork, that’s fine if you’re not doing that, but we’re not banning those things for all of society.

There’s about as much proof for an existential AGI threat as there is for a deity, so let’s not make policies based on either, and focus instead on real potential and already proven harms of AI

I have to disagree here. Disclaimer: I work for a bank but not super into the core financial stuff. Firstly, banks are already super heavily regulated; anti money laundering, terrorism financing, know your customer, etc. The reason crypto takes minutes for international transfers and banks can take days isn’t because of technology, it’s all of those checks on fraud happening. All the money leaving a bank account is, barring very advanced fraud, with the user’s consent, but in fraud cases this is often done via social engineering (calling someone to get their codes from their bank card reader, or pretending to be a family member in need).

What can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence, and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence to boot. I have a very hard time believing any of this mess.

Yeah, this feels like coming home. I tried the other options, but none felt as smooth or as customisable as this.

It’s hard to predict if Bernie would have beaten Trump. The GOP likely has a binder full of opposition research ready to go if Bernie had become nominee, with enough “scandals” and “socialist scare quotes” to mobilize their base even more. Meanwhile, Sanders didn’t even get more votes in the primary.

And yes, Trump winning in 2016 was a huge blow, with a lot of momentum from things like the Comey investigation and a more divided left base than on the right.

But it’s not fair to say that we should turn our back on politics, as this is exactly what causes the “will of the people” to not be heard. If young people want to be heard, they should vote in the same numbers as the older generations, and think strategically about which choices bring the highest benefit in the real world. Voting for someone who represents your ideals with no chance of winning is worse than voting for someone who only partially represents them but has an actual chance of winning. At least until first past the post is eliminated.