Oh I defended them. You're just... no listening. Again and then insult, insult insult. I hope it makes you feel better. Not sure what's going on over in your world. Hope you're ok.

How do you deal with 100% AI companies that don't rent land anywhere? They have no human employees, or maybe just a token human.

> Government has the ability right now to create government isps and give everyone free high speed internet, but they won’t because they’re corrupt.

I hate the way the government is run more than the avg bc I see it daily for my work but come on... it isn't some magical hand-wave that is preventing this from happening. Just think of how many yards would need dug up for one town to have high speed isp. And if one of the hubs go down? So now you need backups.

Ironically, I think the best way to deal with terms in the book you don't understand is to just ask chatgpt to explain it to you. Either by giving it an excerpt, asking it to define a word, or asking it about the book, eg "in the singularity is near, what does Kurzweil mean by algorithmic improvements outpacing hardware?"

Btw this is ChatGPTs answer:

> In "The Singularity is Near," Ray Kurzweil argues that we are approaching a point in the future where machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, an event he refers to as the "Singularity." Kurzweil suggests that this rapid advance of technology will be driven by two major factors: the exponential growth of computing power and the development of more advanced algorithms.

> Regarding the concept of "algorithmic improvements outpacing hardware," Kurzweil is referring to the fact that the speed and power of computers are not the only factors that determine their capabilities. The software, or the algorithms that run on the hardware, also play a crucial role in what computers can accomplish.

> Kurzweil argues that as we continue to develop better algorithms, we will be able to do more with the same amount of computing power, or even less. This means that even if we reach a point where we cannot continue to improve the hardware, the development of more advanced algorithms will still enable us to create machines that are more intelligent and capable.

> Therefore, Kurzweil's idea of "algorithmic improvements outpacing hardware" suggests that the development of better algorithms will be a key factor in driving the progress of machine intelligence, even if we reach limits in terms of hardware capabilities.

Politicians respond to the noise from the people. So if we make enough noise on a topic, they will respond.

So the money sits overseas and not returned to the US economy as the company does not want that money taxed. They'll use it to finance loans and purchases in other countries then ship products back. There's always a workaround. Let the money return to the US or better yet, don't incentivize the companies to go offshore.

> All the platforms are pretty much biased against conservatives

It may be the case that conservative viewpoints are unpopular. Vitriolic and uninformed opinions about non-white, lgbtq, and women's reproductive rights aren't popular and I'm glad they're not.

[deleted]

Copyrights are automatically granted to the creator of the work. Registration provides an indexed record of your copyright so others can see it.

Using work generated by automated processes is a huge liability. Anyone can sue you and claim ownership.

Hack fraud creatives using this tech thinking they are getting away with something are going to have a very rude awakening when their clients/etc sue them.

Perhaps a secondary layer of checkbots might scour the results of the chatbots and offer some kind of feedback on accuracy.

> Jobs can be created by the government by

A job created by the government is a job not created by the market for a reason. If the job was needed someone with interest in the sector would have already created the job, You'd miss the opportunity for other more meaningful jobs are the resources are allocated inefficiently for this government job instead.

Then famirializing oneself with Alignment issue could be a good early step on the way to ASI research.
This https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Aq82XqYhgqdPdPrBA/full-transcript-eliezer-yudkowsky-on-the-bankless-podcast could be a good introduction, imho.

You'd have to define since income Warren Buffett "makes more than his secretary" but not on his income taxes. Hence why he pays less income taxes than his secretary. This argument was all the rage of politicians years ago and it still bothers me.

Depends on the context. Just yesterday I was in a big discussion over on /r/books about the uses of ChatGPT for writing books and there were plenty of situations where anecdotes about conversations I've had with ChatGPT were highly relevant.

I applaud this rule.

Believe it or not, jail.

Lmao. You make wild claims and when asked to defend them immediately run away. Yes, you are deflecting. Because that's all you seemingly can do when someone actually questions your bizzare claims and points out obvious lies and contradictions. You provide sources which don't even support what you're saying and make statements directly contradicting what you've stated previously. When called out you proceed to deflect and whine.

Unfortunately, pictures cannot be added to Reddit comment section

Ok... man I tried with you. I really did. But you're too "smart" man. You can't even have a conversation without acting all high and mighty. You're hostile toward anyone who may have more information than you. That's kind of messed up. But oh well. That's on you. Oh no!! I'm "deflecting!" Hahahaaha. Good luck to you in your future.

Lmao

credit goes to editor

Can you explain why?

To be clear I'm talking about actual perfect VR like the Matrix with all 5 senses, not the crap that passes as "VR" today where parkour is impossible, swordfighting is terribly unrealistic because your enemies are required to be ragdolls, and don't even get me started on Judo/wrestling.

A true direct-to-brain VR will be indistinguishable from the real world and, if the user wants, better than the real world in every way. There are 1-2 legit reasons why you would still want to use the real world, but just wanted to make sure your reason wasn't that the real world is more sensory-rich or "feels more real", which won't be the case with advanced technology.

>Why do anything at all?

Maybe because this way the people actually get to not starve and actually see benefits?

Regardless, a government initiative does wonders to hasten this process and prevent lethargy in the economy. Believe it or not the free market has tons of slow inefficiencies. Hastening the process artificially works quite well.

technology cheapens over time, cars and televisions were only for the rich in the past, and today they are popular. but if they decide to charge more taxes, the technology will not even be used enough to make it cheaper

>It doesn't state that in the code.

Okay so you were lying just before where you implied that it was my ignorance of the American tax code which stopped me from realising that corporate money will only go "elsewhere".

>there's so many ways to avoid taxes for the big companies your head will spin. Look, what you want is for what? Let's start over and how about you start with that. BS wants to raise taxes on ""robots that take jobs"" however you would define that. Those taxes would not be spent on something like UBI or something like fixing our dumb healthcare system (or roads as I tried to tell you that's other taxes that pay for that). Instead, it would be sent to the Pentagon or other government programs that don't really help the average Joe.

That's already a contradictory narrative. You claim they're avoiding taxes but also that the money would automatically go the Pentagon.

It also seems like you're trying to claim that either any budget increase will only go to the Pentagon(something that doesn't exactly agree with what you were saying before and is quite untrue) or that specifically corporate budgets make up the whole of the Pentagon budget and increase in them just means that.

Do you have any basis for any of the possible bizzare claims you're making here?

>Meanwhile, your Mom and Pops that wants to "hire an AI" to do their copywriting will have to pay these new "AI-took-der-job Tax" on top of it their initial cost which will cause barriers to entry into whatever field that MaP Shop is in.

No they won't. Because now you're lying again and trying to claim my argument is the same as Sander's when this thread started with me agreeing with a distinctly different thing to what Sanders wants.

>A tax like this would hurt the very people that he is trying to help.

By magically sending more money only to the Pentagon.