IMO the worst is trying to drag up a fight that was silly 100 years ago. It's ok to think that both Edison and Tesla were great men.....because they were. You don't have to choose sides.

Why would anyone want anything near New Jersey

Oh yeah, I almost forgot about you and your logic-without-knowledge. Smart guy, but you don't know what's going on.

So, let's look at the case of the JWs, since you seem to really like it. What is it about that case that seems shocking to you? Why do you keep bringing it up?

ok, I'm just clarifying what the GGP said

The fermi paradox, plus the lack of reason to establish a colony in this solar system combined with the difficulty of leaving this solar system. It would be much, much easier to have colonies on the bottom of the ocean than to have them on the moon or Mars (and of course, Venus is brutal).

I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see much reason for hope.

He didn't say that (just as the primary purpose of laundry detergent isn't to launder money, it's to wash clothes. LTR). He said the reason Silk Road used it is to launder money. There's a difference.

Because the results are not reproducible. The logical conclusion is that there was some problem with the experiment.

The easy way to resolve the question is to figure out what algorithm the human brain runs. After that, the question of intelligence is trivial.

Read this post. Also consider that the test proposed comes from Ada Lovelace, who predated the Turing test by a long way.

You can see a random number generator with unpredictable events.

lol their test is beaten by a random number generator. Oh well.

I don't think "a chatbot isn't AI and hasn't been since the 1960s when they were invented, whether you call it a doctor or a Ukrainian kid doesn't make any difference" counts as shifting the goalposts.

Furthermore, reproducible results are an important part of science. Let him release his source code, or explain his algorithm so we can reproduce it. Anything less is not science.

Well, you know it's not going to happen when they say, "Up to 60 percent of power might come from nuclear sources." I don't think either major party in America would support that, and other countries are actively hostile to nuclear.

However, more interesting is the idea that every new car sold in America will be electric. For that to happen, it would mean electric cars are cost competitive with gasoline cars. I can't see from the paper why they think it will happen within that timeframe.

Don't be deceived by the cheap consumer goods you buy.......the US still has a huge manufacturing sector, and large-scale construction is one of the things it can still do.

I don't dismiss the science. If you have nothing scientific to say, be gone.