You keep repeating it because a false dichotomy, that you must choose between a D or R, prevents you from accepting that the lesser evil is, in fact, evil. So, you’re stuck on stupid and not asking questions. This should help:

The Democrats already, quite predictably, ignored the outcome of their primary to nominate Clinton. They’re not going to do a fucking thing that doesn’t make a corporate donor money. All of Sanders proposals took from corporations to provide for humans. He never stood a chance of being nominated as a Democrat and he damned well knew it. If we give him the benefit of the doubt then his goal was education. If not, he rallied for Democrats to avoid the rise of a Labor Party during a critical time in history.

We’ve seen this before with Reagan. We took the military industrial complex to the next level. If history repeats with banks deregulated as they are now… It won’t matter one fucking bit, really. It’s not very important whom they choose to front their cons. No President can save us, or would want to. Our oppressor is not our savior.

If it’s after they’re elected then it’ll run down the line of succession: VP, Speaker of the House, president pro tempore of the Senate, then the cabinet.

If it’s before they’re elected, I’m no expert but I believe the Democratic and Republican parties are private organizations that can do whatever the fuck they want, even fail to abide by the results of their own primaries.

deleted by creator

There’s an incredible story behind it. But, the short form is that Proton is more expensive because they’re not harvesting your private information. In a few months the law will prevent them from doing for as long as the core fiscal law and Proton exist (at least decades).

deleted by creator

I’m not actually asking for good faith answers to these questions. Asking seems the best way to illustrate the concept.

Does the programmer fully control the extents of human meaning as the computation progresses, or is the value in leveraging ignorance of what the software will choose?

Shall we replace our judges with an AI?

Does the software understand the human meaning in what it does?

The problem with the majority of the AI projects I’ve seen (in rejecting many offers) is that the stakeholders believe they’ve significantly more influence over the human meaning of the results than exists in the quality and nature of the data they’ve access to. A scope of data limits a resultant scope of information, which limits a scope of meaning. Stakeholders want to break the rules with “AI voodoo”. Then, someone comes along and sells the suckers their snake oil.

deleted by creator

We’re living in a late stage capitalistic hellhole and you’re advocating faith in the free market.

What. The. Fuck.

deleted by creator

Monopolies don’t care about the user experience, only profit. The AI doesnt understand the former, only the latter. The continued degredation of the user experience is a likely indicator of an increase in revenue as function of successful application of AI.

Crypto would at least offer a non-zero chance of ROI.

Your question is good. You’re missing understanding of time dilation and frame of reference. An explanation of the theory of relativity is at least pages long.

The first book I ever read on the subject, and IMO the best introductory text for any non-physiscist, is Stephen Hawking’s “A Brief History of Time”. But, any introduction to relativity should answer your question.