True. Those things are almost exact opposites. You will never waste money by cutting costs, if you are accounting correctly.

I was going to say people aren't addicted to guns but maybe that's not the case.

No it doesn't. Houston has more Hispanics. Chicago has more blacks.

And barriers to importation of guns into Chicago are nonexistent. It's a majority-minority city, which means you would expect its murder rate to be high for American cities because in the USA, murder rates are many times higher among blacks and hispanics than among whites and many times higher among poor people of all races than among middle-income and up people of all races. If you don't figure that in when thinking about violence, you will come to all kinds of conclusions that won't withstand the light of day.

We had this argument years ago when they were talking about putting encryption engines in everybody's phones, but they'd have back door keys and NOBODY WANTED ONE. They still won't. All this will do if passed is prevent anybody from buying a new phone until they have a method in hand to turn off or change the back-door codes so nobody can hack them.

So why not talk to them? This is my main point. You are at the bar for the social interaction.

But the robotic bartender is all wrong for this purpose. Instead, it should be telling you how drunk the OTHER people in the bar are, so you can hit on the chick that's three sheets to the wind and will be easy to talk the underwear off of. A bartender might give you hints about that, but then he might have a conscience. The robotic bartender won't. It can be programmed to sell creeps Coca Cola and that info instead of liquor all night.

Seriously, it's unreadable.

Suppose the experiment had the opposite result. Would you have considered it ethical then?

It's not clear to me that consciousness is well enough defined for anyone to say how it can be synthesized, evaluated or measured, whether animals have it, whether children have it and if so at what developmental stage and whether all adults have it.

No shit! Researchers don't understand how it works, we don't understand how it works, 60% of biomedical research results can't be repeated...

Is this published in the AIR (http://www.improbable.com/magazine/), by the way? It ought to be, because it sounds unethical and crazy on the face of it. Just the kind of thing they like.

But now that the information is out there, it can't just be ignored. Either there's something weird going on that's useful or there's something weird going on that's not useful. Maybe some day we'll all have little remotely controlled (or consciously controlled) electroshock devices implanted in our heads to improve various abilities on demand.

It would have to be negative.

But numbers found on the internet were put there by people. There are infinitely many more numbers not found on the internet than can be found on the internet.

Is it set at Princeton?

# profanity --maximum

Jesus Christ on a stick! an iPhone app? Who the fuck wants to order drinks with a motherfucking iPhone app? What's wrong with using my god damned voice to order my fucking drinks? Who wants to know how many other drinks and in the fucking queue? Do you really think I want to know what horse piss the other doucebags are putting in their drinks?

What makes you imagine I want some machine tracking my drinking habits, much less to be made aware of it?
# profanity off

Why would I want to go to a BAR to avoid SOCIAL INTERACTION with OTHER PEOPLE?

Which makes some politician's car an attractive target for the bat. In my state, they're conveniently marked with special plates.