1

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: Today at 06:02:24 PM »

"While the executive order has been rescinded, existing laws and regulations governing prescription drug pricing and Medicare and Medicaid policies remain in effect. However, the measures from the previous administration that they say was designed to save on costs has now been disrupted."

If the previous administration (AKA - Uncle Hairy Legs) demonstrated anything at all during its existence, it was its decided inability to enable lower costs on anything available to the general public.

Wait til you see Donakd "I want everything more expensive" Trump.

2

Technology & Information / Re: Autonomous weapons systems

« on: Today at 02:27:18 PM »

Of course, it is not the "pinnacle of all time."

And neither is it the "current pinnacle."

Regarding availability to the public, maybe, but DARPA has more advanced systems for sure.

Maybe.  Maybe not.  No way to really know.  They probably have more combat centered AI systems but are their systems better than other AI models in some generic metric? 
Would a DARPA AI for coding (assuming they even have one) be better than a commercial produced one?

3

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: Today at 02:20:32 PM »

Start at 5:29

video snipped

I think the important bit is the part about unringing the bell of conviction.  Taken out of context, sure, sounds like it.  But it was specifically referring to people who thought that a pardon meant their conviction was erased.

No, it doesn't.

Stop being ridiculous.

It specifically states if you accept a pardon, it is an admission of guilt.

There is nothing in the DOJ statement that says, "just in this specific case is an acceptance of a pardon an admission of guilt."

Then explain "You can't unring the bell of conviction" which is said right before?

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: Today at 09:52:28 AM »

Start at 5:29

I think the important bit is the part about unringing the bell of conviction.  Taken out of context, sure, sounds like it.  But it was specifically referring to people who thought that a pardon meant their conviction was erased. 

5

Technology & Information / Re: Autonomous weapons systems

« on: Today at 08:01:46 AM »

At present, ChatGPT, i can assure you, is nowhere near the pinnacle of AI.

Pinnacle for all time?  No.
But we have no idea what the pinnacle is.

6

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: Today at 07:19:51 AM »

The DOJ under Biden clearly stated that acceptance of a pardon required an admission of guilt of the crime.

Got a quote?

7

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: January 21, 2025, 06:12:11 PM »

There is only 1 law on Pardons: the constitution.

And you really should have read the text, it would have given you a win.  Instead, I have to correct myself.

Article 2, section 2, clause 1
...and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

So he's limited to impeachment cases.  That's it.  That's the only limitation until the supreme court says otherwise.

8

Technology & Information / Re: Autonomous weapons systems

« on: January 21, 2025, 05:30:06 PM »

Is ChatCPT the pinnacle of AI, LD?

Really?

At present?  Probably, yeah.
In 20 years? Maybe, maybe not.

9

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: January 21, 2025, 05:14:24 PM »

No president has absolute power and unlimited power.

Not the job, no.  But feel free to tell me what limits they have on Pardons.

10

Technology & Information / Re: Autonomous weapons systems

« on: January 21, 2025, 01:45:48 PM »

AI can certainly write code that will compile.

I do not know where you are getting your information or why you are choosing to write false information.

Oh sure.  It'll do well documented stuff.  Hello world, making a login page, maybe a short function.
But ask AI to say... Write a Linux OS, and it will not compile if you get anything at all.
Or ask it to code a chat program that can send video, audio, and text.  You'll get nothing useful if anything.

And just the code to look at an image and identify objects is extremely complex.  Forget decision making on what to do with that info.

But if you believe otherwise, go ask ChatGTP to make you an auto targeting program.  Then try to compile it.

11

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: January 21, 2025, 12:05:26 PM »

It is not the idea of the power of pardons being absolute and unlimited that is dumb, LD.

It is the idea that pardons can be granted prior to any finding of guilt or culpability.

They're the same thing.
Unlimited and absolute power means it has no limits, like pre-pardons. 

Regardless, I agree.

12

Technology & Information / Re: Autonomous weapons systems

« on: January 21, 2025, 10:32:07 AM »

How could I post some code matching code used by an AI.

And you are correct, Ronj. Your experience alone does not qualify you to be an expert in the field of AI capability.

You can still have an opinion on the morality of its use and that is primarily what this thread is about.

The fact is AI can write programming for autonomous weapons systems. There is no disputing that.

Yes and no.
AI is a big 'next word's predictor.  And it uses that with its training data to make code.  What it spits out will depend on the complexity of what you ask it to do as well as how documented the code you want, is. (Ie. Lots of examples vs few)

It also will have issues staying coordinated with itself.  Like not keeping variable names consistent across functions.  Or not using the correct number of arguments when calling a function.

If you get anything back, it's not gonna compile, much less work.  Manual coding and fixing will be required.  And for anything autonomous, it's gonna take more work to fix it, than to code it from scratch.

13

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: January 21, 2025, 09:36:42 AM »

Ideally he wouldn't have to do something like this, but Trump would have very likely abused his office to pursue revenge against the people who investigated him instead. It's also very likely he'd have targeted Fauci to pander to the conspiracy nuts who still think that covid was a false flag and the vaccine was a time bomb or whatever. Those same conspiracy nuts regularly ignore the fact that Trump took credit for the vaccine and encouraged people to take it, but as I've said before, Trumpism is inherently contradictory.

Sadaam, let's get real.

Ideally, he couldn't do something like this.

The fact you think it is okay for him to do it is a morally bankrupt position.

The issue with Covid is not that it was a "false flag." It is the issue of "gain of function," which is "the something" Fauci had to do with.

Ideally, but the powers of pardon is absolute and unlimited.  Which is dumb.

14

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: January 21, 2025, 07:08:38 AM »

Regardless of whether or not this is a stable or wise investment, it's not something that the president should be attaching their name to or otherwise getting involved in. The presidency is a full-time job, with no room for side gigs. We don't want a president who has one eye on the country and one eye on their business interests. That's just inviting all sorts of conflicts of interests - not legal conflicts of interest, which the president is exempt from, but factual conflicts of interest, where they're tempted to do something that benefits their bank account but doesn't necessarily benefit the country. And when I say "we," I really do mean it, because this isn't a partisan point. Ten years ago, the overwhelming majority of Americans (along with every single person who's posted in this thread) would have agreed that of course the president shouldn't be in business for themselves while running the country.

A large chunk of America would disagree, given they elected Trump again, despite him never really separating himself from his business interests.

15

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: January 20, 2025, 08:01:49 PM »

So far, President Trump has selected at least 19 former Fox News hosts, journalists and commentators for senior positions in his second White House term.

Well... That's definitely not corrupt or anything.

16

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: January 20, 2025, 04:29:38 PM »

What is the objective difference between Bitcoin and any other digital currency?

Branding and name recognition.

17

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: January 20, 2025, 03:46:14 PM »

So, how long til Trump changes the official US currency to Trump Coin?

18

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Sexual Scandals

« on: January 20, 2025, 03:21:44 PM »

Often times you promote the opposite of what you hide to avoid being called out or to introduce plausible deniability.

19

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: January 20, 2025, 05:59:20 AM »

You're overthinking things. What it really came down to was this - TikTok praising and flattering Trump in several different public messages. That's what Trump responds to more than anything. He doesn't believe in any ideals or hold any actual political positions of his own. He makes his decisions based on gut impulses and personal whims. That's why  TikTok felt the need to glowingly refer to Trump by name in their messages, and it's why we saw people like Zelenskyy and the Greenland PM rushing to kiss Trump's ass in anticipation of him handing over Ukraine to Putin and doing something incredibly stupid and reckless to try and get control of Greenland, respectively. Trump fans undoubtedly see these public shows of fealty as a sign of Trump's strength, but in reality, it's the opposite. Someone who's this susceptible to flattery and lets their own emotions and personal feelings overrule their policy positions is not fit to be a leader.

Yeah but can you see anyone as American as a narcissist who acts on the whims of flattery and unleashes fire and fury for a slight insult?

20

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: January 19, 2025, 08:14:28 PM »

https://www.npr.org/2025/01/19/nx-s1-5267568/tiktok-back-online

Trump has unbanned Tik Tok by declaring he won't enforce the law.
Isn't this something Republicans HATE?  The president not enforcing laws?