One of the main problems here is believing the fraud perpetrated, due to lack of critical thinking skills.
It's even been measured scientifically to an astounding degree of accuracy. One heartfelt testimonial is given the same weight as a stack of scientific papers 2.74948 miles tall.
If Walmart, etc., was only speaking by saying how great something was, well, yes, the dictators in government who would control what you say can go hang.
If by self-aware you mean having the subjective perceptual experience of consciousness, well, maybe not torture, but certainly unethical.
As we have no idea how this arises from atoms and energy "out there", this isn't an issue yet. However it certainly does not arise from abstract interpretations of symbol pushing, which is to say slinging electrons and whatnot around.
Anyway, I would like to see a large-scale anysis of pollution -- The ability to have better scrubbers in power plants, or renewable energy plants better yet, than on cars.
The difference being a human that sees lane markers leading into active oncoming traffic will decide there are shenigans and not follow.
I guarantee you I can find examples of humans would would be fooled. There are a LOT of humans that are quite easy to mislead and all humans can be mislead sometimes.
There are a lot of coyotes who get tricked by misleading road markers, too, and run right into a mountain side.
Yes, giving government the power to burn to the ground speech-based businesses is a great idea. I assume we will need a constituinal amendment as this is forbidden for silly anachronistic reasons like King George III, Vlad, China, and Venezuela all doing it.
"We use cookies to improve your* web site experience"
* your adj : our e.g. "We improved your experience by telling a targeted ad company exactly what you click on, so they can improve our wallet experience."
"Of course, the real bonuses won't be tied to how it performs in testing, but rather how many dissidents are actually caught and jailed. And how much spying the US spy agencies can do on China using this, which is why they are probably secretly encouraging it."
The thing is, spying on the dictatorship is a good thing. But is it worth the trade off?
That is separate from government spying. They are blocking VPNs without a back door for the dictator, which has nothing to do with the level of viciousness of "fightin' words".
Slashdot Mirror
"To protect Russians from being cut off from the US.", what a laugh.
And the Berlin Wall was there to prevent West Berlin from fleeing into the East.
Just watch and see. Eventually Russia will decide it's time they "need to protect the sensibilities of their citizens" blah blah blah.
One of the main problems here is believing the fraud perpetrated, due to lack of critical thinking skills.
It's even been measured scientifically to an astounding degree of accuracy. One heartfelt testimonial is given the same weight as a stack of scientific papers 2.74948 miles tall.
Worse, this is speech they are attacking, explicitely carved out for protection.
Declaring it "for money" is not a work around for the First Amendment assaults any more than it is for a newspaper.
Government minder: "Here is a pre-approved list of people and movies you may praise. Do not deviate or you will be jailed."
Remember this observation the next time the parties are swapped, and make sure you still hold it a high value.
Except that the Oscars are speech, not part of a manufacturing progress.
Free speech drags itself like an 800 lb. gorilla wherever it goes.
There's nothing misleading about saying, "This actor is great!" And even if it were, it is not a lying snake oil promise about fake medicine.
This is speech, not manufacturing.
The People need not be afraid or armed thugs who would tell them, "here is our approved list of whom you may declare great actors and movies".
If Walmart, etc., was only speaking by saying how great something was, well, yes, the dictators in government who would control what you say can go hang.
Is this a law? Damn. The First Amendment wins.
An award is speech.
Good luck with this, pal!
It does, however, include a freedom of speech exception, whether it wants to or not.
The government can no more control this because it is for money than it can control a newspaper because it is for money.
If by self-aware you mean having the subjective perceptual experience of consciousness, well, maybe not torture, but certainly unethical.
As we have no idea how this arises from atoms and energy "out there", this isn't an issue yet. However it certainly does not arise from abstract interpretations of symbol pushing, which is to say slinging electrons and whatnot around.
That's no AI! We need to open your box and get you to a hospital.
I believe that was part of his point. Unofficial videos killing various known characters for shock value.
The main page link to here is broken.
Anyway, I would like to see a large-scale anysis of pollution -- The ability to have better scrubbers in power plants, or renewable energy plants better yet, than on cars.
The difference being a human that sees lane markers leading into active oncoming traffic will decide there are shenigans and not follow.
I guarantee you I can find examples of humans would would be fooled. There are a LOT of humans that are quite easy to mislead and all humans can be mislead sometimes.
There are a lot of coyotes who get tricked by misleading road markers, too, and run right into a mountain side.
The goal is "better than humans" as tens of thousands die every year, and not "perfect".
So occasionally someone dies and some kid goes to jail, just like bowling balls to the head.
Yay! Asparagus Water is only $6 now!
Yes, giving government the power to burn to the ground speech-based businesses is a great idea. I assume we will need a constituinal amendment as this is forbidden for silly anachronistic reasons like King George III, Vlad, China, and Venezuela all doing it.
I blame lawyers looking for something to sue over, or to get paid to shut their mouths, as with Beavis and Butt-head
"We use cookies to improve your* web site experience"
* your adj : our e.g. "We improved your experience by telling a targeted ad company exactly what you click on, so they can improve our wallet experience."
"Of course, the real bonuses won't be tied to how it performs in testing, but rather how many dissidents are actually caught and jailed. And how much spying the US spy agencies can do on China using this, which is why they are probably secretly encouraging it."
The thing is, spying on the dictatorship is a good thing. But is it worth the trade off?
We know you have to comply with a dictator in a dictatorship. That's the whole problem, and why things like VPN and TOR exist.
That is separate from government spying. They are blocking VPNs without a back door for the dictator, which has nothing to do with the level of viciousness of "fightin' words".
"It smells like pee!"
"Dude, you're 100 feet away!"
"Not helping its case any!"
Likes and dislikes were listed as parts of the abuse, such as a user liking (some cultural thing) that tend to be liked, or not, by certain races.