cudgy

OK. Now I understand where you’re coming from. You are using an analogy to insect groups with the term eusocial, which is defined as “cooperative brood care (including care of offspring from other individuals), overlapping generations within a colony of adults, and a division of labor into reproductive and non-reproductive groups.”

Not sure I would use the word organized to describe this though. It actually sounds more like hunter-gatherer society / commune / family. It does seem unlikely that this could happen on a global scale though. It’s more likely to occur in smaller groups, because without some familiarity between the people, they’re unlikely to open up with such personal activities like child rearing.

Anyway, I like your idea. Humans coming together to ensure fairness is going to be necessary. I just don’t think it’s a realistic expectation to expect this at the global scale.

What may be feasible is for people with similar occupations joining together in global labor unions for leverage against the corporations. These unions could have standards for how workers interface with corporations, especially global corporations utilizing AI and or other technologies that impact society in a potentially harmful way.

If you leave your front door open, you’re gonna get a lot of strangers and stray animals in your house. If you don’t have the desire to close the door, I guess you’ll just give in and get familiar with your new roommates.

I’ve never understood why people use android, which was built by the largest advertising company in the world. A company with a history of violating privacy, scanning personal data for advertisement purposes. Also, what amazes me, is that many technical, well-informed people continue to use standard android os, knowing full well that they’re giving up major privacy protections and using a much less secure platform than alternatives like iOS. I’m sure there’s good reasons for it that people have and can rationalize.

The main rationalization that I have seen from technical people is that they just hate Apple. They’ll never use Apple, even if they have to give up significant privacy. Other people like the fact they can customize the device (which I like as well), but unfortunately, makes it easier for bad actors to customize your phone in ways you don’t want.

Makes sense. Pretty sad to have to install a tool like that to get security on a platform that is used by billions of users. Even more shocking that apps get installed just from clicking a small close button on a silly ad without even prompting for the install?

Installing random tools to hopefully get more security, though is risky also. Hopefully that tool doesn’t get compromised as it is privy to all intent activity.

Are you seriously trying to tell me that the Democrats have never denied a visa? Oh. I see now that you added “based on social media posts”. Still, I fail to believe that Democrats would admit someone into the country knowing that they posted something on social media that demonstrated the applicant is lying, made threats against political figures in the US, posted to known terrorist or friends with known terrorists, etc.

In fact, the Biden administration sued for the ability to continue the Trump policy of looking into social media. Here is an excerpt from the lawyer that was suing the Biden administration.

“We’re disappointed that the Biden administration has decided to double down on this Trump-era policy of mass surveillance of visa applicants’ social media,” said Carrie DeCell, senior staff attorney with the Knight First Amendment Institute.””

https://knightcolumbia.org/content/biden-administration-tell...

Interesting how the racial demographics are much less diverse compared to large East Coast cities. For example, there are far fewer African-Americans (5%) percentage wise in San Francisco versus a city like Atlanta (46%) or Philadelphia (40%). In most of these cities, moving out of the neighborhoods where Asians live would actually place you in the worst school districts. The worst schools tend to be in mostly black and latin neighborhoods.

For the purposes of determining the effect of screen time on education, we would need to compare the performance of Chinese or Indian students over time along with a measurable increase of the use of screens and compare that to say American students. Simply comparing American students to Chinese or Indian students is not sufficient.

Not sure what you’re saying here. I think you’re saying you can just observe the top performers and measure whether the top performers use screen time frequently outside of school. Not sure this works as it’s probable that the top performers are gonna be the same in both situations.

However, my concern was with the use of screens IN schools as part of the curriculum and as a replacement of textbooks and other sources.

We are far from UBI though. It will take major league arm-twisting to get the government to take care of citizens like that. The oligarchs want it all, and it’ll take some serious work to overcome their resistance to increasing their taxes for UBI.

Also, AI may be more capable by the time we even get there if we ever do and AI may be a better entrepreneur than a human. Once that happens, look for the cost of AI to go sky high and access to it highly restricted and only available to the elite.

So humans are just running around as unorganized individuals, hermits, living in small tents in the woods by themselves. There are no borders or countries or associations of humans. We are all just unorganized. Really?

Either your definition of organized is different than mine or this is a silly conversation.

The point is that guns are not the only weapon that are used to harm people. Fewer guns does not necessarily prevent people from harming others. If making comparisons between countries, account for the population of the country and that guns are not necessarily used in the same frequency in all countries so we should be looking at school incidents as a whole including stabbing, shootings, automobiles, or other lethal methods.

So the people with the least amount of experience would be making all the decisions? You must be a young person.

So if you’re wealthy and have connections, you can get a gun in the UK?

What about school stabbings? Or use of other weaponry or substances?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_stabbings_in_the_...

Was watching a documentary a few weeks ago regarding the many bomb shelters in Switzerland, and it mentioned that during World War II all adult citizens were required to have a gun in Switzerland and citizens were trained on their use. Switzerland‘s goal was to make itself very difficult to be attacked by Germany and to ensure that all citizens were capable of fighting back. This in combination with the mountainous terrain, and the many fortifications were claimed to be a reason behind Switzerland, not being attacked by Germany. Not sure about the veracity of that though.

Finland be a wee bit smaller than the US and 1 per day in US is a huge exaggeration. 13 total in US in 2024 … you were only off by 1,300% though. Also, Finland has the population of 1/2 of Los Angeles. Wow

Weird. Why are no Latin or Asian kids bussed?

They want to speed up the process of getting laws written to protect them and AI. One way to do that is to appear like you’re looking for a solution while at the same time mentioning how urgent things are and how we need to pass laws quickly. You can guess how those laws will be focused, but my guess is it will be focused on benefiting the AI companies and companies that plan to use AI companies to build their companies.

The reasons for that will be proposed as protecting the citizens from the evil other country that’s building AI. “Without strong AI, we can’t build weapons to defend the country.” and “without strong AI, our companies won’t be able to compete in the world marketplace.”

“So unless humanity recognizes this and decides to organize as humans (not as europeans, or alabamans or han etc…) then this is the only possible outcome.”

Why do you think this is the only possible outcome? Aren’t we already organized as humans? Won’t people revolt when this really hits the fan?

Serious question. What should people retrain in? What jobs or training will provide long-term income potential? You don’t want to spend four years retraining for a job or career that only lasts for two years or seven years. My point is that let’s say a new technology comes out or new occupation. How long will it take for the AI and the robots to be able to perform that occupation? Can people train and actually work in that career before the robots take it over?

Is AI the proverbial apple in Adam and Eve? Are we justifying taking a bite of it just because it’s there? Are we helpless and unable to defend ourselves against it? My worry is that thoughts like these and questions like these are going through young people and their decisions about how to provide and proceed into a career. Are we headed towards learned helplessness?

“My current preference is a guaranteed educational/training stipend for any unemployed adult who wants one, and changing the standard career advice for the next generation from "learn to code" to "learn to startup".”

I agree with this sentiment in the short term for people that have coding or startup skills already. We may need to ask ourselves at some point. Why work for a company when I can use AI to create a competitor to my employer in two months?.

However, this is not a long-term solution as not everyone can be a startup. Startups fail at a huge rate and they’re gonna fail even more and more startups and more people are competing to be startups. Startups don’t pay money until they start making a profit which could be years, so it’s not a legitimate replacement for a current position. This seems like a very, very competitive low, low cost of entry race to the bottom type of market so many of the benefits may quickly disappear.

AI companies are in a difficult position right now. Anthropic is taking the lead by looking like they care and are concerned about the effects of the technology that their feverishly building.

I don’t trust them. Their strategy is to say “don’t worry about all your jobs being taken by our technology. We (AI companies) are going to be taxed so much that you are going to be living a wealthy and fruitful life making meme photos and looking at AI porn. Don’t be concerned about how you’ll pay your bills. We’ll work it all out. Trust us.”

So how does the a country protect itself? If it opens markets, then it becomes at the whim of the global marketplace, which is completely greed, focused, ultra capitalism. We end up with what we have now in the US: lots of cheap crap, but poor income growth.

If it closes its markets and creates an insular market that provides workers decent pay and focuses on the citizens by having a self reliant economy that minimally require inputs or outputs from other countries, what is stopping companies from leaving the country? Capitalism or at least pure capitalism with open markets appears to be not working for the vast majority of the population of the worldor at least unable to be reconciled with the disparities between different countries. The only groups that appeared to benefit or gain improvements are those at the bottom, because they can be easily exploited while at the same time feeling like they’re making more gains economically. Once this group’s wages reach the level that is higher than the another group, the cycle repeats all the corporations rotate to the new low cost region, causing all sorts of disruption, etc..

“For example defining what "fair use" is for AI training, that's a clearly new area.”

I am not a patent attorney, but it seems like a clear violation of copyright. Based on your comment above regarding the breath and focus of laws and the fact that you feel the copyright law was not well specified for the AI situation. How could the current law have been written such that it would’ve handled the AI situation and avoided this mess that we’re in now?

My guess is none of it matters because now the AI is so important and so critical in the minds of many government leaders and business leaders that any violation of copyright will be excused, making the original law, meaningless in this situation, and undercutting this entire discussion.

Whose weapons are Ukraine using? Who trained Ukraine how to use these weapons? Where did Ukraine get the majority of the money that it’s using to blow up buildings in Russia and kill Russian soldiers? Where is the intelligence that Ukraine uses to determine its targets come from? Do you seriously think Ukraine has satellites in space monitoring?

The answer to every one of those questions is the United States.

Maybe a small time period during the hippie era near the end of the Vietnam war?

My main point is that I get tired of people from both sides of the aisle democrat/republican making comments about how the other side does or doesn’t do stuff that their own party does as well? It results in virtually no decent discussion and everybody pointing at each other, even though they basically want the same things. It is very cultish and unproductive.

What does this have to do with which party has more of a proclivity to go to war? Why does everything have to devolve back to Trump?

By the way, I think Trump‘s stupid comment about training the troops in cities was absolutely stupid and deserves to be called out. However, you would be foolish to think that other leaders prior to him haven’t thought similar thoughts, but just haven’t said it out loud.

You would have to compare it to a cohort using no screens to know whether there was a benefit or loss.

First, salaries for teachers must be compensated for the fact that teachers get three months off for summer amongst many other holidays that other workers do not get. Also, teachers get regular salary increases and have generous pension plans. I know several teachers personally that retired after working for 30 years and now have pensions paying 75% of their last highest salary for the rest of their lives, including survivor benefits.

Second. Screen Time causes many issues in schools. Not the least of which is the distraction they causes children in the classroom and between classes. Another issue with screens and schools is the cost of these screens and these Chromebook and all the IT and infrastructure that’s required in order to basically just read some material. Prior to chrome books you simply had books and the books lasted for decades, potentially with no further expenses required. The whole educational system is an absolute mess with tons of waste and inefficient processes. Adding technology in Chromebook on top of it all was not helpful.

This is an interesting take. Based on what you’re saying, then I presume that in India and China academic performance is dropping as well?

maybe it’s not about race. Maybe it’s because the parents of the kids that are bussed-in are less confident to push back out of fear that their kids would lose the privilege of being bussed-in to the “better” school?