Sometimes I day dream about what I’d say if I was elons friend. There are a lot of things.

Peer reviewed science gets overturned by other peer reviewed science all the time, the other person also had peer reviewed science so you don’t get to just wave yours and win.

And yes your agenda is very obvious, you take the side of not wanting to be in a nuclear war - I think that’s pretty much a universally agreed upon position.

However you also have another facet to your opinion which is almost as universally disagreed with as your other position is agreed with - you think that science should be falsified so it seems to provide answers which suit your social and political aims rather than it being an effort to understand the world and reach a truthful and valid conclusion.

You were very aggressive and rude to someone who did nothing more than provide more context and dissenting evidence in a discussion about science, that’s not a good way to behave.

Who said it was an acceptable scenario? That’s not been suggested.

You’re saying we should belive any story that makes nuclear war sound even worse than it obviously is regardless of its scientific accuracy. Science should be objective truth not whatever serves the agenda you’re trying to push, even if it’s objectives are good.

Yeah, especially in the southern hemisphere, a few centuries later we might have slightly different genetics through rapid evolution via population collapse but we’d probably be back developing with a bit more accurate folk knowledge and probably actually a lot of remembered tech.

It’d be terrible to the people it happened to but barely a blip in the life history of the planet from the first evolution to the last lifeforms leaving or dying.

This sort of obviously emotionaly driven vitriol makes it look like you want people to belive this regardless of if it truth as you feel it serves an important goal. The other person on the debate has shown an understanding of the issue and history of this topic while remaining civil, I don’t see you counter any of his points or raise any evidence in your favor outside gishgallop links which you provide without explanation or demonstrated understanding.

I don’t know or really care who’s right because it’s meaningless but you certainly don’t look like the person with a valid position here.

It’s funny a good open source washing machine with wifi could be amazing, would allow for so much more control by letting you modify programs and view diagnostics but proprietary hardware is never going to let you do the good stuff because the you wouldn’t need to buy the more expensive but physically almost identical models.

Thats a bit of a wild leap. Would you be against using tech to respond rapidly to a gunshot in the school? Like those audio sensors which can pinpoint its location and alert security instantly?

For many it’s not the only thing but it’s an important option when something comes up or things don’t go according to plan, when the choice is ends don’t meet so you need to borrow money from a predatory lending service to avoid eviction or repossession or starvation then having the option of working evenings and weekends is a life saver.

Likewise people who work like I do where I can earn what I need to most the time, even do well occasionally, but there might be a quiet period out of my control then gig work is again a real life saver.

And yes there are ‘alternatives’ but once this is killed they get killed too, I’ve been looking at the job market recently and it’s very hard to find work that isn’t ‘you will work to our schedule which might change on a whim and if you ever so much as ask about a week or two unpaid time off you’re out’

They already mostly fucked up gig work here in the uk, my American friends have a far easier time and earn better because we purposely scuppered them so that people can’t have any self sufficiency, freedom or determination. If I was in charge there would be a government body that helps people get in on work like this when needed, not policies to make sure people in difficult times or positions can’t do anything but devote their entire being to finding a corporation to live for.

Comments like this make .me angry even though I know you can’t actually make it happen

The real problem was that they achieved vendor lockin and thought that made them safe but couldn’t offer anything even slightly unique that wasn’t available free on other exercise bikes - or rather they could have but just didn’t.

They wanted to offer the absolute lowest quality experience for the highest price and hoped that name recognition and advertisement would carry them.

Ironically though bootstrapping is also now a term that means to install computer systems or fabrication hardware starting with the most basic tool then using that to create the next tool needed in the install process - going from a hammer to a laser cutter is a lot of steps but it’s not impossible.

I always thought it was popularized by the guy who rode a cannon ball into battle and fought a giant crocodile - barron von munchausen, from where we get the name for people who fake medical conditions- but his claim was to have saved himself from drowning by pulling himself up by his own hair. I wonder if that 1785 book why boot straps were mentioned in the textbook you mention.

Yeah, I’d sort my life out then spend a load hiring people to work on useful things simply because I want them to exist, open source and creative commons things that exist for everyone.

It’d give me a sense of purpose and something to focus on, mostly things that should exist already like a really good and efficient small washing machine that can be made by any small fabrication company, easily repairable and upgradable so it’s cheaper for people living in apartments than using overpriced coin op machines landlords often install in utility rooms.

There are so many ways of making actual positive differences in the world, if people with excess time and money worked on projects like this then everyone could live little better, meaning more people would be able to work on things and life would be better for everyone which would mean that people are less desperate and struggling so places would be safer and nicer which would mean there’s more nice places to visit and people are happier so doing more interesting and fun things which means no one would need so much money to enjoy life in a way even billionaires can’t afford now.

The good thing is we don’t really need rich people because the workers always do all the actual work so by working together as a people we can donthings like create vast networks of informative videos helping each other fix our cars - an example which has already happened and greatly benefitted many people I know and myself.

The weird guy making videos of how to change spark plugs on am obscure old car and getting 40 views is doing far more towards making a better world than then greedy asshole that makes proprietary and subscription based exercise bikes no matter how much money he manages to hoard for himself.

This only hurts working poor like me by making it harder for people to have quick temporary earnings. These rules are not about helping people or fairmess it’s about messing up options so people are desperate enough to lock themselves into shitty jobs rather than have any self determination.

Yeah you have intelligence in the scientific definition but I certainly wouldn’t use the word colloquially to describe you…

You’re objectively wrong and I’ve clearly demonstrated that so you’re calling me ai? Ok buddy, continue looking stupid then I guess

Again you’re confused, it’s the same difficulty people have with the word ‘fruit’ because in botany we use it very specifically but colloquially it means a sweet tasting enable bit of a plant regardless of what role it plays in reproduction. Colloquially you’d be correct to say that corn grain is not fruit but scientifically you’d be very wrong. Ever eaten an Almond and said ‘what a tasty fruit?’ probably not unless your a droll biology teacher making a point to your class.

Likewise in biology no one expects a slug or worms or similar to analyze and solve problems but if you look up scientific papers about slug intelligence you’ll find plenty, though a lot will also be about simulating their intelligence using various coding methods because that’s a popular phd thesis recently - computer science and biology merge in such interesting ways.

The term AI is a scientific term used in computer science and derives its terminology from definitions used in the science of biology.

What you’re thinking of is when your mate down the pub says ‘yeah he’s really intelligent, went to Yale and stuff’

They are different languages, the words mean different things and yes that’s confusing when terms normally only used in textbooks and academic papers get used by your mates in the pub but you can probably understand that almonds are fruit, peanuts are legumes but both will likely be found in a bag of mixed nuts - and there probably won’t be a strawberry in with them unless it was mixed by the pedantic biology teacher we met before…

Language is complex, AI is a scientific term not your friend at the bar telling you about his kid that’s getting good grades.

I use it for fun, frivolity, and beauty.

That’s because you don’t have a basic understanding of language, if you had been exposed to the word intelligence in scientific literature such as biology textbooks then you’d more easily understand what’s being said.

‘Rich in nutrients?! How can a banana be rich when it doesn’t have a job or generational wealth? Makes me so fucking mad when these scientists lie to us!!!’

The comment looks dumb to you because you understand the word ‘rich’ doesn’t only mean having lots of money, you’re used to it in other contexts - likewise if you’d read about animal intelligence and similar subjects then ‘how can you call it intelligence when it does know basic math’ or ‘how is it intelligent when it doesn’t do this thing literally only humans can do’ would sound silly too.

You don’t understand the difference between altering a precariously balanced system which involves billions of.moving parts and starting something relatively simple from new?

Sorry I didn’t realize you thought Elon is the only person involved in space travel, that would explain why your opinion is so myopic j guess.

And yes this is science, that’s what science is - studying and learning about how things work so that we know what the effect of our actions will be and what options we have available.