Come on, we all know this is the only way this will fly.

I assume the intend is to have dumber system just enumerate all possible ideas en masse and have them patented automatically. That way if someone proves one approach to be actually useful you can file prior registration.

Google and Cloudflare actively work on software with the intend to deanonymize website users without their knowledge. What you think are all those recaptchas for? And they plan to get rid of cookies so you cannot even control them by deleting files.

If you want to preserve anonymity, start with the pros.

Germany has this too.

Because there is a large number of politically aggressive people who see every job and business endevor as a mechanism to redistribute money, power and attention not something you do for personal interest or because you are good at it and thus want to switch equal opportunity with equal result.

The nice thing about social is that it allows you to ignore privacy considerations because social means public.

Now do this with construction sites where you suddenly have to leave the highway in the middle of nowhere in the middle of the night and you are alone so you cannot hold and check the map permanently. I had multiple instances of this where the alternative route would have been really complex to calculate if it hadn't been for the navigation system.

I think it's analytic potential is dangerous enough even without intelligence. Imagine say a camera that from a video of your everyday behaviour reveals character traits undesirable to society using markers you didn't even know exist. You would be excluded from anything resembling power without knowing even knowing why.

*project discontinued*

Springtime for AItler?

"He who reads this is stupid."

>>> Money is not "trying to punish people," it is "trying to make people make economic decisions that incorporate the cost of what they are doing."

This is effectively the same just in fancier words.

>>> Exactly. Putting a dollar value on pollution (or carbon dioxide emission) allows each company, and even each individual, to make those decisions, rather than the government.

By setting a dollar value you deprieve them of the decision at least partially. You just don't know how much and this gives you the illusion of freedom.

But it is not hard limit for carbon emissions. If you know that they can go without gas or coal you can just ban these and get the result you want. If you merely tax them you basically admit that you know they can't do without but want to punish them anyways. Alternatively, you say that pollution is ok if it earns money.

Of course, you can also sell a limited amount of pollution rights to essential facilities to allow for "a little pollution". But that would require you to say which facilities are of public importance and which are not.

Conclusion: One is trying to punish people for problems they don't understand beyond "it is bad".

Mobility is also a type of profit.

To be fair, driving itself is based on the idea that some risk is acceptable for mobility.