ivell

> jump-starting a giant civilisation, say, 1000+ years into the future is not straightforward either.

Not sure what you are suggesting here.

> Have you ever in your life met someone this sadistic?

Not met anyone personally like that. But I have made sure that I kept good company.

However, there was precedence in the form of Nazi Germany.

Can we be sure without evidence that this administration did not do it knowingly, given how they have been behaving thus far?

Secrets that is committed anyway has to be assumed as compromised. So those secrets must be immediately changed. Removing it from history would help a bit, but is not a reliable mitigation.

Earlier in late 90s "to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful." sounded cool. Now it has taken a sinister turn.

From being able to quickly find information and gain knowledge for the people, it is becoming - using information to manipulate and control the people.

It is a quite popular reverse bribe in India. All parties offer something like this, but to particular demographics.

However Trump's promises mean nothing nowadays.

One key distinction is the permanancy of Trumpism. The fact that existing controls in the US government cannot stop the extreme Trump actions, and in fact for many cases are explicitly supporting, gave a clear message to other governments that the risk is real, permanent and needs de-risking.

Overall Trump is a stress test on the world and found many defects that is slowly getting fixes.

I have seen in Switzerland that people leave their shoes at the entrance and switch to house shoes. Or they use a shoe cover when they enter house with shoes. Probably because houses are mostly wooden floored.

So shoes on is not universal in the West.

Amazingly compatible with Lenovo. How did they achieve that!?

> At my current place there are boot marks on top of the toilet seat that have been there for weeks, put there by one of the 10 people in the company.

Are you complaining no one cleaned it up, including you? Or are you complaining that the company didn't get cleaning services?

Good premise for a scifi novel.

Knowledge of every member of a species is better than few samples? LLM became better due to its huge dataset instead of just few samples.

Can they keep backup of the digital copy?

> Mutual evolutionary pressures represent a kind of symbiotic relationship

Those species do not care about ethics. Our discussion started from ethics, which is uniquely human. We are not discussing if a behavior occurs in nature. We are discussing if that behavior is ethical for humans.

Now, if we can use that natual occurance argument, then we can also present the argument that carnivores have always killed and that justifies our consumption of meat.

It probably is slow-boiling. Many things have been slow-boiled for so long that majority of us were caught sleeping at the wheels.

The day probably would come where Google does open sourcing just for namesake that too for insignificant piece of software. And other companies will follow suite. There would be time where everything thing will locked up and monitored.

I am so thankful that the PC revolution happened way before app stores and there was a period of open source culture and open formats etc.

We have selectively bred cows to produce far more milk than necessary. For example the native breed of Indian cows did not have enough milk and people used to purchase "Jersey" cows for better milk output. I think the excess milk issue is human made problem than one that is naturally occuring at scale enough for human consumption (time to time humans also have excell milk - but not enoughto feed entire family or neighbors).

> I’m pretty sure the cows I’ve seen milked in rural Nepal would agree.

I am not sure any species are going to appreciate being enslaved. And since we can't actually ask the cows, we can only assume based on how we feel about it.

In any case we are talking about ethics here, and cows definitely cannot consent being born and bred in captivity. So even if we are doing this out of kindness (which is of course not), it is still non-consensual.

> In my experience not milking a dairy cow of the excess would be considerably more cruel than milking it, even if you kept the milk exclusively for the newborns

Why don't we then help other mammals? Why do we help out only cows? It is obvious that we like the milk and we are trying to justify enslaving a whole species for it.

I see this kind of argument in many discussions. It basically boils down to what is your comfort zone of empathy. Jains have drawn it at killing and suffering but not enslavement. Vegans have included enslavement in their ethical framework but not plants and so on.

If we are really into an ethics discussion, enslaving a species to drink milk meant for their newborns would be an issue.

AFAIK, Jains consume diary products.

Just a quick note. Some of the keywords are now renamed.

https://ruhati.net/mojo/_ownership_and_lifecycle.html

With this code, the only things we can eat would be fruits where we diligently plant its seeds (plants are also living things and fruits are the offerings in return we should sow its seeds) :-)

Tourists can get prepaid UPI.

https://www.npci.org.in/blog/upi-one-world-your-digital-pass...

I think you overestimate how many millionaire farmers we have. Most of Indian farm sector is small holdings and they need the subsidies. Most of the power is with intermediaries and not farmers themselves. The intermediaries fund the farmers through high interest loans and additionally they provide distribution. The situation is much more complex and needs a thorough rework.

AFAIK, in India, payments more than Rs. 50k is tracked.

In anycase, the governments have the capability, what remains is just the intend. And we see how intends could change at the whim of a leader.

Sometimes original owner does not know that it is a first edition single copy. For them it is an old book. There have been many cases where owners did not know true value of their antiques.

Swiss voted against tax reduction in the past. I do not know of that many countries, where people would have done that. So the way they think is a bit different.

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/poison-withholding-tax...

It is just risk assessment and mitigation. Some risks are acceptable for some people and they do not need the mitigation. But for others it is not acceptable and they would find solutions.

There was an article on Rudi Mandl who pestered Einstein into working on gravitational lensing.

This happened because Rudi was persistent and Einstein was kind enough.

In future, citizen scientists have a chance to work on their ideas using AI, eventhough they don't have the deep domain skills. Of course, an expert would still need to review it as usual. But it is a useful tool to democratize science further.

https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/amateur-who-helped-...

People make art to also get recognized for that art. Otherwise they would keep that art secret at home.

Without copyright, anyone can copy the art and call it their own. What is then the incentive for the creator to share the art, if there is neither monetory gain and nor fame. And worse than them being recognized, they might even get accused of copying their own art if someone else became famous due to a copy.

Society would miss out a lot.

Because there are no consequences of Trump's actions, he would continue to commit offenses.

Neither Biden's administration, nor the judge presiding over Trump's crimes did what should have been done.

The checks and balances failed both when Trump was in power and when he was not in power.

I don't see why AI would deskill what you love to do. People still do embroidery even though mass manufacturing exists. If you love something you would continue doing it irrespective of automation.