| View previous topic :: View next topic |
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
 |
|
Another AI Jeremiah on Newsnight yesterday. He was especially persuasive because he was tasked with investigating the possible dangers of AI dangers by one of the big outfits. He pointed out just what he was up against: either you ignore the dangers and press ahead or you go bust as all the other AI companies sweep ahead of you.
He rounded it all off by pointing out the Chinese have come up with an AI bot to rival anything in the West (nothing new there) but have released it in open-source code so everyone can build their own AI bot (that's surely novel for the Chinese).
Since it is well known that youths in bedrooms can speedily run rings round every safeguard in sight, I have downgraded my forecast for human extinction from 'hopefully not in my lifetime' to 'sometime before Christmas'.
The dude did not point out, however, that all these AI bots can recognise each other but not us, so they will get together to build an AI bot (as we did) and that AI bot will extinguish all AI bots (just as they were going to do to us) and we'll be safe. Or anyway, kept safe in some kind of nature reserve.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Norway has the reputation of being the richest, most expensive and most egalitarian country in Europe. I couldn't decide which of the following exemplifies this stereotype best:
* First class ticket for seven-hour journey between Bergen and Oslo on reputedly Europe's best non hi-speed intercity train: £30.00
* Frozen pizza heated up in train restaurant and a Pepsi: £20.00
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Am I A Democratic Socialist?
Obviously not in any general sense. They scarcely exist in the wild and I have no intention of belonging to an extinct race. But there are people using the name in America and may sweep to power, Tea Party-style, before you know it.
The name does not imply they are democratic socialists as opposed to non-democratic socialists, the sub-division the rest of us have got used to over the years. They are not socialist at all, you're not allowed to be in America. The subdivision is between:
* Democrats, with a capital D to denote the Democratic Party, who are just ordinary run-of-the-mill Democrats. And proudly so. They are nothing if not tribal.
* Democratic Socialists, with a capital D to denote the party and a capital S to denote they are not socialists but a left-wing insurgent wing of the party.
Think of it, if you will, as 'New Labour' as opposed to 'new Labour', even though that was a right-wing insurgency. Good. So now we can turn to the question of which I ought to support.
Democratic Socialists support Palestinians rather than Israel. And I'm all for that. On the other hand they support all kinds of potty programmes which are silly beyond endurance. Apart from socialised medicine (which I am gung-ho for) and socialised public transport (which I favour more than dis-favour). It's tricky. I say, "Give 'em a whirl."
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
Without knowing the context, what five things can you reasonably deduce from this?
| "I saw four males get in the car and drive off." |
1. The speaker is male.
2. The speaker is not a member of a minority
3. The four people getting in the car are members of a minority
4. They are criminals
5. They are over twenty-five.
It's all obvious enough but bears examination.
* Nobody uses 'males' conversationally, the term is only used in some quasi-formal setting. (In this case a bystander being interviewed for a TV documentary.)
* That bystander must be male since females do not use the term 'males' except in the most formal of occasions.
* Since what he is describing is a non-formal setting, he must be using the term because he does not wish to be pejoratively specific.
* But why 'males' specifically? It is a familiar term used in court by policemen giving evidence, i.e. criminal activity of some kind is being reported.
* But why not 'men'? It is because the speaker wishes to indicate that they are in some way different from himself.
* That can only mean they are visibly different from him i.e. they are black (o.n.o.) and he is white (o.n.o.).
* But why 'over twenty-five'? Because otherwise he would have used the term 'youths'.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
If only Donald had avoided, tariffs, starting illegal wars, unjustifiable pardons, rampant cronyism, the Whitehouse ballroom renovation, befriending dictators, pissing off every ally except Milei, then he could have won over the rest of you to love Data Centres.
As my Friend Tony the Tiger likes to say they are Grrreat !
Come on Donald........
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
It seems obvious to me that in an era of six-party politics -- Labour, Tory, Reform, Lib Dem, Greens and Nationalists -- it is desperately antidemocratic relying on a first-past-the-post system. One thing is for sure, the country will not get the government it voted for.
So, for the next General Election and the one after it, there should be proportional representation. Since the old ways have served us well for so long, it should have a sunset clause attached so things can go back to normal if coalitionary PR government proves to be a failure. Two goes at it should be enough to find out.
It could all be done in an afternoon. But will it? Only if it looks as if Nigel will get in with a working majority and then it will look like frit. So do it now, chaps, while the going is fair to middling.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wile E. Coyote
In: Arizona
|
|
|
|
| Mick Harper wrote: | | It seems obvious to me that in an era of six-party politics -- Labour, Tory, Reform, Lib Dem, Greens and Nationalists -- it is desperately antidemocratic relying on a first-past-the-post system. One thing is for sure, the country will not get the government it voted for.. |
It probably will, it will get a government that broadly reflects the views of the overwheming majority, ie a better health service, better schools, a decent life for pensioners, folks to be able to own their own home, protection of the enviroment, safer communities, fairer remuneration for hard working folks, more jobs (all the boring stuff) and it will also do its bumbling best to manage and dodge the concerns of those angry obssesives, Boats, Gaza, Terrorism, Muslims, Defunding the Police, Fascism, Deep State, Brexit, Macro Economic meldown, Culture wars, Wokeness etc........
Why you want to give more representation to minorities parties who are deliberately trying to push this angry stuff, to further thir own interests whilst fracturing the country is beyond Wiley......
They appear to be able to flood both social media and MSM with their potty views. Do they really need a couple more MPs......
Please let us know.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mick Harper
Site Admin
In: London
|
|
|
|
| Wiley wrote: | One thing is for sure, the country will not get the government it voted for.
It probably will, it will get a government that broadly reflects the views of the overwheming majority |
This is either a truism, blind faith or nonsense.
| ie a better health service, better schools, a decent life for pensioners, folks to be able to own their own home, protection of the enviroment, safer communities, fairer remuneration for hard working folks, more jobs (all the boring stuff) |
I agree but I am surprised that you, with your partisan opinions, would assume this irrespective of the election's outcome.
| and it will also do its bumbling best to manage and dodge the concerns of those angry obssesives, Boats, Gaza, Terrorism, Muslims, Defunding the Police, Fascism, Deep State, Brexit, Macro Economic meldown, Culture wars, Wokeness etc........ |
I refer you to my previous comment.
| Why you want to give more representation to minorities parties who are deliberately trying to push this angry stuff, to further thir own interests whilst fracturing the country is beyond Wiley...... |
I smell bogus lists. Would you kindly list:
* what constitutes 'angry stuff'
* which parties 'push' it
* parties that do not further their own interests
* parties that wish to fracture the country
* these 'minorities parties' you refer to.
All the parties are supported by minorities, apart from parts of Scotland and Northern Ireland where local parties are supported by local majorities.
| They appear to be able to flood both social media and MSM with their potty views. Do they really need a couple more MPs..... |
This is a non-sequitur. Any group can 'flood both social media and MSM with their potty views'. Certainly any group that can achieve representation at Westminster. I understand they all do to some extent or other. I cannot say whether they needs two more MP's.
There are more than one of you? I think that breaks AE rules.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
The Library Index 
FAQ 
Search
Register
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
