• 0 Posts
  • 22 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 8th, 2024

help-circle

  • You keep repeating it because a false dichotomy, that you must choose between a D or R, prevents you from accepting that the lesser evil is, in fact, evil. So, you’re stuck on stupid and not asking questions. This should help:

    The Democrats already, quite predictably, ignored the outcome of their primary to nominate Clinton. They’re not going to do a fucking thing that doesn’t make a corporate donor money. All of Sanders proposals took from corporations to provide for humans. He never stood a chance of being nominated as a Democrat and he damned well knew it. If we give him the benefit of the doubt then his goal was education. If not, he rallied for Democrats to avoid the rise of a Labor Party during a critical time in history.



  • If it’s after they’re elected then it’ll run down the line of succession: VP, Speaker of the House, president pro tempore of the Senate, then the cabinet.

    If it’s before they’re elected, I’m no expert but I believe the Democratic and Republican parties are private organizations that can do whatever the fuck they want, even fail to abide by the results of their own primaries.












  • There’s been no rulings granting a transgender rights greater than another. It’d have been global news, the consequences of which would still be cascading through the judicial system.

    So, when this transgender person was granted what may have been, after an arduous battle, equality in one situation, you disagreed.

    What defines humans from other animals is complex communication and it’s derivatives. I need not know the transgender person, be transgender myself, or even have a gay friend to feel basic human sympathy and empathy for them. That’s the minimum human response: neutrality, equality. Anything less is animalistic hatred.

    Edit: I’ve passed judgement on just this perspective you hold, not on you as a person. If I didn’t believe you valuable I’d not have invested the time to explain why I expect more and believe you capable.



  • I’m not actually asking for good faith answers to these questions. Asking seems the best way to illustrate the concept.

    Does the programmer fully control the extents of human meaning as the computation progresses, or is the value in leveraging ignorance of what the software will choose?

    Shall we replace our judges with an AI?

    Does the software understand the human meaning in what it does?

    The problem with the majority of the AI projects I’ve seen (in rejecting many offers) is that the stakeholders believe they’ve significantly more influence over the human meaning of the results than exists in the quality and nature of the data they’ve access to. A scope of data limits a resultant scope of information, which limits a scope of meaning. Stakeholders want to break the rules with “AI voodoo”. Then, someone comes along and sells the suckers their snake oil.