The farmers who bred plants and animals over decades by applying specifically chosen selection restrictions on them certainly predicted where their efforts would lead to ("If we do THIS for another 10 generations then the apples will be bigger or the dogs faster!"). Even without interference we can observe conditions and predict how a species will adapt due to evolutionary mechanisms.

> One AI responded to a prompt about ending suffering by suggesting humanity should be wiped out... Pretty pointless sentence because it lacks relevant information about that prompt. What's "a prompt about ending suffering"? It would be easy to ask a question to which "humanity should be wiped out" is the only logically correct answer. That's not "dark", let alone "malicious" on the LLM's side. (That it's not that easy is probably due to programmed in bias to just not suggest stuff like that, but I just got ChatGPT to admit: "The only physically feasible way to guarantee the end of all human suffering is to eradicate all humans." That doesn't make it "malicious", though. Only logical.)

Wouldn't it be telekinetically instead of telepathically?

I would really love it if "learners subs" were a common thing, i.e. where the subtitles are literally, 1:1 the exact words that are spoken. So many times they are shortened or just messed up for whatever reason, with words changed at random. That makes it very hard for people to learn the language, while otherwise subtitled movies would be the perfect tool.

Iä! Iä! Cthulhu fhtagn! Ph'nglui mglw'nfah Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!

Yes, it matters. Consider, for example, this rare photo: https://spaceflightnow.com/201...

Al-Qaeda and ISIS? Do those even count as "culture"?

Of course they did, but they didn't _attack_ Germany. They were rightfully pissed off after Germany attacked them first, breaking the contract that said that both of them would attack and share Poland. So this can't be counted as "attacking western europe", since Poland was clearly east europe at the time.

Even more amusing: NSO offered it to german agencies too, but they didn't buy it, because, allegedly, it was too powerful for them to use it in compliance with the local laws. Source in german: https://www.tagesschau.de/inve...

https://www.theguardian.com/ne...

They don't really decide that in detail. They just sell it to a lot of governments, ask them to please not do evil things with it, and then these governments can decide which journalist or whatever did something wrong enough to have them murdered...

Because of hygiene-paranoia and/or dirty, antisocial people there are no sugar cubes anymore in regular restaurants or cafes, just little bags. Of course, with these it's easier to decide on smaller amounts. Still, cubes are much more civilized and stylish :D

Well put. Let's hope that more and more people realize that and stop this kind of work.

But maybe the people who are turned on by such advertisement are the ones most in need of actually watching a movie that shows them why it's wrong? If it was more obviously advertised as a move against this stuff then they wouldn't watch it and wouldn't listen to the message.

That is nonsense, because that just isn't what "pedophile" means. Claiming it does, in order to accuse people of it, is indeed 1984-style. Let's ask wikipedia, I think most reasonable people would agree to this general definition:

"Pedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children."

So, in laymans terms, if one desires to have sex with kids, then that's a pedophile. It isn't relevant for the question "pedophile yes/no?", if that person acts on their desires or if they think it would be ok or if they believe it would be the same as, say, violent rape of an adult, or whatever. On the other hand, the opinion on these questions doesn't define whether one is a pedophile. It's even possible for someone to believe that it's totally fine when kids and adults of any age have sex, _without_ being a pedophile themselves. It's also possible to have these urges and never act on them and despise them and to believe that it would be totally unacceptable to have sex with children - but that wouldn't change the fact that this person is still a pedophile.

Maybe it's easier for the simple minded to understand when compared to homosexuality. I, for example, think that homosexuality is perfectly fine. It's ok if two men or two women engage in sexual activity that both of them want to do. But that doesn't make _me_ a homosexual, because I'm not interested in sex with people of the same sex.