i suggest you try out that methodology then get back to me.

"office, i didn't notice i was going 85mph in a 45mph. i realize now i was, sorry."
"officer, i don't know anything about this meth in my backpack. i'll throw it out as soon as i get home. i promise."
"officer, i thought this was my house and my laptop, i realize now i'm in the wrong house."

if the cop was dumb enough to fall for that once, how many more times do you think it'd work on them?

that's absolutely the WRONG thing to do. transit only works in densely packed cities / communities because that's when it's cost effective. if you cap density you get urban sprawl which makes everything more expensive ... utilities, law enforcement, fire, garbage, and so on. not to mention, all of those people that are forced to live in the boondocks because of the capped density still need to commute into the city for their job.

check your license. it has your address on it.

i have legitimate business driving on any public street i choose.

english isn't your first language then?

i agree and never said differently.

all i ever said was that in at-will states, an employer can terminate their relationship with an employee at any time, without any reason. that's so obvious my only conclusion is that you are 12 years old and have never been employed and don't speak with your parents much.

i realize that the imaginary conversation you are having with me is much more complex, but you'll also have to imagine my responses from now on since i'm only able to converse with you in the realm of reality.

in the face of a lack of information, the right thing to do is go on what you do know and fill in the rest with common sense ... not speculate on every silly possibility in the universe. you want to know how i know he didn't have a contract? i know that because MIT has many, many lawyers at it's disposal. do you really think this matter wasn't discussed with their legal counsel?

the fact that he wasn't employed makes it much simpler. do you really think that a private organization isn't allowed legally to terminate it's relationship with an individual that it doesn't even employ?!?

yes well we're talking about Massachusetts, so no need to speculate on what might be the case in other states eh?

also, he may or may not have magical powers that allow him to set his enemies on fire. how about focusing on the facts we know?

terminating an employee doesn't equate to "stomping on their rights". see below.

now are we done?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...
are we done now?

MIT didn't take legal action. they just disassociated themselves from him and his work.

the govt isn't involved (unless they decide to prosecute criminally). it's a relationship between an employer and an employee. and as i stated, nothing needs to be proven. you might not like it, but that's how it is (in the US).

and putting all that aside, you can trust in this: MIT knows exactly what they can and cannot do. they've been here before 1000x. they have staff lawyers. trust me they are doing exactly what they have the right to do.

dude, he lectures are still online, it's just that MIT doesn't want an association with him or his lectures. it's their right not associate with him. it's your right to think they stink for doing so (or whatever your point is).

you are thinking about certain legal systems, not employer-employee relationships.

an employer doesn't have to prove anything to terminate an employee. almost all employment (in the US) it at-will meaning either party can terminate the relationship at any time for most any reason (excluding sexual and racial discrimination, and probably a few other things i'm not smart enough to think of right now).

there's also no reason that AI will brew better beer, unless you program it to do so. if coding for self-interest has come up 100x in this thread, i'm pretty sure someone will attempt it.

does a mouse that avoids a cat, and breeds as much and fast as it's facilities will allow have self interest? does a virus that replicates as fast as it's programming allows have self interest? does a computer virus that is coded to spread between systems have self interest?

self interest doesn't need to be a complicated notion. self interest is programming, biological or otherwise, to increase your numbers (your family, your species, or whatever). we often think a self interest as the will to survive, but biologically speaking, the only purpose of a longer life is to reproduce (more).

"Ask the human in the street what 'Artificial Intelligence' means, and they won't say 'a chess computer' or 'something that answers questions on a TV quiz show'."

fortunately, we don't base our definitions on popular ignorance. this is from wikipedia,

which sounds about right, and clearly encompasses things lesser than self-awareness.

"If it isn't self-aware, it isn't AI. It's just a useful application."

did you learn that from hollywood?