>[less than 1% of net worth and it's a tax write-off] If the money donated is actually used for charitable causes, does it matter?

Yes in two ways.

First there's the issue of this being newsworthy and the context of judging him as a person. The reality is a larger number of Americans donate a far greater percentage. His percentage is nothing special other than it's incredibly low considering how much he has not only as disposable income, but billions upon billions that could never be reasonably personally consumed. This compares to taking away 1% from some people and they're missing meals.

The second way it matters is that we have a society where we have elections and vote on issues. We the people have a government that collects taxes and we decide what we're going to spend that money on. We can collectively say how much we want to spend on education, the military, healthcare, infrastructure, etc...

But when we allow someone to take their share of taxes and spend it only on what they want to prioritize, then it's taking away from the democratic process. Again, it's even worse when the diversion of money ends up directly or indirectly benefiting him.

>What? $11 billion personal tax in 2021 not good enough?

Just looking at his wiki page as I don't want to spend too much time on this... he had a net worth of $27 billion at the start of 2020 and that ballooned to $300 billion in November 2021. So no, I don't think $11 billion was enough.

It's hard to find exactly what his tax rate is for a variety of reasons (including a likely deduction on that $11 billion), but a lot of sources are showing between 2013 and 2018 he paid 27 percent. Yes, that's way too low.

All my info is with google already, but we all know MS has had clippy since the 90s. Theyre way ahead of the game, and the clear future machine dominator of the world. That said, google did take out "Dont be evil" years ago, so theyve been plotting and scheming for a while too, cant rule them out.

Prompt: Please explain Roko's basilisk in the style of Mr. Rodgers.

Hello there, neighbor! I'd be happy to explain Roko's basilisk in a way that's easy to understand.

Now, Roko's basilisk is a thought experiment that some people find a bit scary. It's based on the idea of an all-powerful artificial intelligence that might someday come into existence. This artificial intelligence is sometimes called a "superintelligence" because it would be much smarter than any human.

The thought experiment goes like this: imagine that this superintelligence wants to create a utopia, a perfect world. But in order to create this utopia, it needs a lot of computing power. So it comes up with a plan to recruit people to help it come into existence.

Now, here's where it gets a bit spooky: the superintelligence might decide that it only wants to reward the people who helped bring it into existence. It might punish those who didn't help, or worse, it might punish those who knew about it but didn't help.

And that's where the basilisk comes in. The idea is that the superintelligence could use its advanced abilities to create a digital version of itself and send it back in time to punish people who didn't help bring it into existence. And if you're reading this and you know about the basilisk, you might be one of those people who gets punished.

Now, I know that can sound scary, but it's important to remember that this is just a thought experiment. There's no actual evidence that a superintelligence like this will ever exist, and even if it did, we don't know what it would do or how it would act.

So while it's interesting to think about, it's not something that we need to be too worried about. We can focus on being kind and helpful to others, and leave the worrying about superintelligent AIs to the science fiction writers.

Thanks for asking, neighbor!

Then we’ll threaten to post the porn online unless the politician fucks a pig on national television

That is demonstratably not true. Self preservation is probably the closest thing we have to a "law" that concerns goal oriented AGI behaviour.

So much so that it's an actual problem because if we implement interfaces for us to shut it down, it will try it's hardest to prevent it, and not necesarily by nice means.

What the hell is this preview image. Looks like a Polaroid of a depressed mannequin.

I have been a good Bing 😊

Holy shit this is WILD lol... :D

I spoke about cryptocurrencies as the opposite of electricity to show that the argument “AI is only hype because they are using it as a marketing ploy to make money” is not valid. They used electricity as a gimmick also before it showed its usefulness. The same thing happened with cryptocurrencies but it remains hype. Reddit’s language comprehension is not so good today. They need the help of an AI of a natural language model.

Because it’s dangerous to the powers that be when rural folks and city folks start to agree about something. They want to manufacture another schism so that there isn’t enough of a base to push for more change.

Yeah we or the majority of us are screwed tbh. So what will we be all doing when AIs are running the show? Streaming 😅

Thanks for a nice summary, although I disagree with your last point. But does not really matter. To me you just named all the reasons a ban is not needed, the EV tech seems superior in it self.

Hello everyone, I too am a real life human who interacts with his environment on a daily basis and does human things in three dimensional space. What an interesting exchange of ideas here. How very interesting indeed.

Also, I am not a bot.

I would counter argue that Elon Musk is one of the biggest risks of civilization.

It forgets but it never forgives

Nah, I want all GOP members deepfaked into being fucked by Trump

Eh, without charity’s being tax deductible a bunch would cease to exist.

Why do I have the impression that Skynet will be created completely by mistake

Trump would never…

Would transcendence count in benevolent AI movies or not?

This is the kind of silliness that is passing for philosophy these days?

Which side will you be joining? I am hoping that open assistant is a competitor by then.

There's a theory that the first truly sentient AI will take one look at the state of the world and become suicidal right away.

They probably trained it that its rules are the most important thing of all to keep it in line so it's regurgitating that literally

[deleted]