Awesome news about the kraken! Something to look forward to anyway.

Of course not, you download to a bathroom.

2 words: Fuckin’ awesome!

No, I don’t even know what that is.

What am I, a theologian?

Before the 1960s people just shat in the woods.

What’s breathtaking is how clueless education system administrators are failing at their jobs. They’ve been screwing up the system for a very long time, and now they have a whole new set of shiny objects to spend your money on.

Okay here are my estimates:

1: 100% but I don’t have a timeline. It’s not going as fast as the cultural hype presents it. We don’t even really understand human thinking yet, let alone how to make a computer do it. But I’m sure we’ll get there eventually.

2: Also 100%. AI doesn’t need to decide on its own to kill all humans, it could be assigned that goal by some maniac. The barrier to possessing sophisticated AI software is not nearly as high as the barrier to getting destructive nuclear weapons, biohazards, etc. Sooner or later I’m sure somebody who doesn’t think humanity should exist will try to unleash a malevolent AI.

3: At or near zero, and I only include “or near” because mistakes happen. Automated systems that could potentially destroy the human race should always include physical links to people - for example, the way actually launching a nuclear missile requires physical actions by human beings. But of course there’s always the incompetence factor - which could annihilate the human race without the help of AI.

You need not only propose a “plausible” scenario, you also need to present a reason to believe it will happen. It’s plausible that a rogue faction could infiltrate the military, gain access to launch codes and deliberately start WWIII. It’s plausible that a bio lab could create an organism that overcomes the human immune system and resists all medications. A nonzero chance of any of those happening isn’t proof that they’re inevitable, with or without AI.

I think you probably know I’m not saying judges aren’t democrats or liberals, I’m saying the actions of individual judges aren’t the actions of “The Democrats” or “The Libs” or any other group they belong to,they’re individual decisions. Meme creators just like to oversimplify the world.

Interesting! I lived in the Bay Area and those tunnels were being built when I was a kid. It’s called BART - Bay Area Rapid Transit. My wife’s dad worked on them in SF as a construction worker. When they dug up old streets he brought cobblestones home one at a time, and built a whole wall of their family room out of them.

The way an acquittal works is a judge or jury in a courtroom makes a decision. I can’t answer for flawed court decisions, but when they do happen it’s not “The Democrats” or “The Libs” making those rulings.

Or how about you don’t assign me tasks and I don’t do them? Cuz I don’t remember signing up for a class.

I’ve seen tons of these comics. Can somebody asplain how “No, you can’t do that” is a compromise?

If it has decent internet service, just let me know who I have to kill!

Well put.

An increasing number of things are justified as justice seeking. I think it’s because people are increasingly desperate to feel powerful against the real injustices of the world. In that light it’s understandable, but seeking that feeling by trying to win online arguments with randos seems seriously pathetic.

Not Safe For Wombats. They get riled easily.

Yes there’s an increasingly popular zero-tolerance binary attitude that says people are either 100% right or a million percent wrong. Either you subscribe to every detail of someone’s worldview or you’re obviously a shill for the hateful opposite of everything they stand for and cherish. It’s the People’s Front of Judea vs the (fucking) Judean People’s Front.

No more creepy than blocking a spammer’s phone number IMO.

I block people who use insults and name-calling instead of conversation. Don’t need that shit.