Take notes? Seems to me that cigarette companies could conduct master classes on how to ensnare children as consumers. Remember Joe Camel?

Well, that's why I said it varies by country. I wasn't just thinking of China, Russia, and North Korea, but also others that one would consider more wholesomely democratic.

I just did a search and found this report with an interesting map showing what steps various countries are taking with regard to misinformation.

Many countries have had laws against spreading false news for some time now. Steps to encourage/enforce compliance vary though.

Who knows? Maybe the ultimate sign of AI becoming intelligent is when it becomes funny.

And then ... maybe Skynet combined with Monty Python's deadly joke?

1. Form a hypothesis based on current knowledge and understanding.
2. Perform experiments/observations to test the hypothesis.
3. If the experiments/observations refute the hypothesis, then reject the hypothesis. Else accept the hypothesis provisionally and keep testing.
4. Go back to 1.

FTFY

Ahem.

False equivalence.

Biden took the documents by accident, found them himself, confessed, and co-operated with the government to return them.

Trump, on the other hand, took the documents on purpose, denied he had them, was subpoenaed and then searched to retrieve them, and then claimed he had the right to keep them. Which he doesn't.

Well I'm sure they won't. Goodness knows there's a shit-ton of other things they're ignoring.

Yes, but not because of dementia. Perhaps he was verbally dyslexic though.

Indeed. Many world leaders have had trouble speaking. Biden overcame a stutter. George VI struggled with one. Many other famous people as well.

Having trouble getting the words out is not disqualifying when one chooses a leader. But a cognitive issue should give one pause.

You just blew up the claim in your username.

Does the Pope exist? How do you know? Have you met him?
</sarcasm>

DarkOx has refuted many of your points already. I'd like to add a few comments.

I don't think it would be nearly as apocalyptic as you make out. We have more vulnerable technology now than in the mid-1800s, but we also have over a century of researching the problem and developing models to predict and mediate the effects. For example, when we know a CME is coming, we can disconnnect power-distribution systems from each other to make them less vulnerable. And we can design satellites to withstand all but the most severe charging events, and launch new ones with the infrastructure that would likely survive unaffected.

The effects of a Carrington-like event would be significant today, but unlikely something that threatens our survival as a species.

That's true of the initial EM radiation. However, the CMEs are comprised of ionized particles that travel much slower, on the order of hundreds of kilometres per second. They would take days to arrive at the earth. The CMEs can damage satellites via electrostatic charging, and create magnetospheric substorms that can disrupt communications and generate currents in power lines and pipelines. The initial EM radiation would warn us of the arrival of CMEs, so we could take measures to weather-out the arrival of the CMEs.

If you think we can just move into space, or to another planet, you're dreaming. Carl Sagan said it well in his Pale Blue Dot book:

Citation please? And I mean for your specific claim.

I don't doubt that politicians can SNAFU projects like this, even to the point of massive failure. But that's no reason to believe that massive failure must happen. Many ambitious projects that relied on government funding have gone on to achieve great success.