hackyhacky

8 ms·

1.
by hackyhacky 3d ago
> You are not smarter than your dog in dog behavior. That's true, which is my point: intelligence is not a scalar value. LLMs are intelligent from us in different ways, as a result of not being human, despite having access to a re
2.
by hackyhacky 3d ago
> What mechanism would an AI have today to simultaneously kill every single human being? Lull us into a sense of complacent idleness over the course of centuries by slowly taking on more responsibility for maintaining human civilization,
3.
by hackyhacky 3d ago
> If it's smarter than you, it can foresee everything you can, and come up with plans better than I can. I'm smarter than my dog, yet I am frequently unable to foresee my dog's actions. Serious response: we have no idea wh
4.
by hackyhacky 3d ago
The political, rather than legal, justification for unrestricted gun ownership in the US is that an armed citizenry is able to resist a tyrannical government. Regardless of your opinion on that argument, I don't think it applies well a
5.
by hackyhacky 3d ago
If the trigger has already been pulled, then we're off the hook. That genie ain't going back in the bottle! Pop the champagne and order 3 more data centers, pronto.
6.
by hackyhacky 3d ago
> if you know of an industry that’s properly progressive and countercultural and could conceivably pay at least survival wages * Be a hallucinogenic therapy shaman. * Start a cult. * Work as one of those paid protesters that they always
7.
by hackyhacky 3d ago
Those who have knowledge, don't predict. Those who predict, don't have knowledge. — Lao Tzu
8.
by hackyhacky 3d ago
OK, I'll bite. What, in your opinion is happening? What should we be doing instead?
9.
by hackyhacky 6d ago
You the real MVP
10.
by hackyhacky 7d ago
> Nobody except you is talking about history. You're kind of missing the point of my comment. You said, in essence, that it's impossible to learn about Communism unless you've experienced it personally. > China and Nor
11.
by hackyhacky 7d ago
Formally specified: there exists some human woman, in whose hand this will fit.
12.
by hackyhacky 7d ago
I read it. It's definitely a rebuttal.
13.
by hackyhacky 7d ago
> which in turn means it was intended to be the last. That's a bold and misguided assertion of authorial intent. Since you're a fan of the scientific method: you can please cite sources in support of your claim?
14.
by hackyhacky 7d ago
Is the purpose of school to make you do things that you'll enjoy?
15.
by hackyhacky 7d ago
> Teaching it to young minds who have not experienced the difference between the realities of communism and the rest is a vanity at best. So, we shouldn't learn about history until we experience it ourselves? Seems like that would e
16.
by hackyhacky 7d ago
> Problem is that book is based on so many things that we know are untrue about humans Which parts specifically of Animal Farm are untrue? Greed, hypocrisy, cruelty, avarice? Or the talking animals?
17.
by hackyhacky 7d ago
> They could be spending eight hours a day in the Kindle app reading classics Have you been around kids recently? I think we all know what they're doing on the phone, and it's not The Great Gatsby .
18.
by hackyhacky 7d ago
>This book cannot prove anything, other than one person's opinion on history You've misunderstood the purpose. Fiction was not ever intended to achieve scientific goals, i.e. to discover the truth about our universe. It's
19.
by hackyhacky 8d ago
> I do not support groups that aim to overturn election results, So you don't support Trump, who has tried to overturn the 2020 election results? You don't support Reform UK, who have expressed an interest in bypassing democrat
20.
by hackyhacky 8d ago
In at least two senses, yes: 1. It is owned by the public. The public has a right to know how its tax dollars are being spent. 2. Certainly there is no expectations of privacy in a jail cell, as the jail administrators and guards can enter
21.
by hackyhacky 8d ago
>and will be disenfranchised under Republican voter ID requirements. Can you explain this further? A person who can legally vote today, but in the future cannot vote because of election restrictions, will be disenfranchised. You are supp
22.
by hackyhacky 8d ago
> My criticism of the left has nothing to do with the "incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result." That's not what I said. You are criticizing the left for disliking el
23.
by hackyhacky 8d ago
> Please reread the definition of hypocrisy. Okay. Hypocrisy: behavior that contradicts what one claims to believe or feel You claim to be opposed to authoritarianism but you actually support authoritarian right-wing groups. Seems pret
24.
by hackyhacky 8d ago
You can't just say "whataboutism" whenever someone points out your blatant hypocrisy.
25.
by hackyhacky 8d ago
Republicans tolerate democracy when it goes their and do everything to undermine it when it doesn't. See exhibit: Trump
26.
by hackyhacky 9d ago
> they never won a majority in a free national election. They legally won a plurality in the Bundestag, which is sufficient for Hitler to be legally appointed chancellor, which made everything that follows legal. Like it or not, the Na
27.
by hackyhacky 9d ago
Incredible sense of deja vu. I feel like I was just having this same conversation with another user who has the mind of a 13 year old child. > The point was you thought IDs for voting were not free I guess you choose to dwell on this par
28.
by hackyhacky 9d ago
> He is Jewish, not White. You are aware that it is a cornerstone of antisemitic thought to consider Jewish people to be not white?
29.
by hackyhacky 9d ago
Were you pleased with the functioning of Germany democracy in 1932?
30.
by hackyhacky 9d ago
> Yes leftists are the least likely to know AfD supporters. Can you please tell us about your first-hand experience with AfD supporters? > The most openly antisemitic groups in Germany are leftists, so, I don't want to ask them a

More ›