Hi - thanks for this thoughtful response.

I do like the flexibility of Javascript-like languages - e.g. that one can just add an attribute to any object. But one pays for that:

I am working on a pure Javascript front end with a Java back end at the moment, and whenever I have to make changes to an object that needs to pass between the two, it is a real headache on the Javascript side - there is no compiler to find all the places where I used the object based on its old definition...

So pros and cons.

Yes, C is a brilliant language.

"AI performs better with strongly typed languages. Strongly typed languages give AI much clearer constraints..."

As Guido van Rossum, the creator of Python once wrote,

"I've learned a painful lesson, that for small programs dynamic typing is great. For large programs, you have to have a more disciplined approach. And it helps if the language actually gives you that discipline, rather than telling you, 'Well, you can do whatever you want.'"

The TVs now monitor what you watch, and sell that data. But (by law) you can disable the monitoring. It's hard to find the settings, but the TVs have setting to turn off monitoring.

No premium seats for cross-country or international flights? Then I won't be flying anymore. No thanks to the MISERY of being stuck sitting upright in a seat, often late at night, unable to recline or sleep, for 5+ hours at a time. And no thanks to the MISERABLE gate waiting area, which also has no place to recline. Economy flying is an AWFUL experience. NO THANKS.

"Sorry, but the opinion of a nobody on slashdot isn't a measure whether someone "understands" what science is or not"

I am a scientist, with masters degrees from an Ivy League school in both nuclear science and operations research. Your comment that science is just a hobby is dismissive, arrogant, and ignorant. If not for science, we would not have cellphones, cars, or any other modern conveniences. Science is based on a combination of theory and experimental proof.

Science is performed by humans, who are flawed, so science is as imperfect as humans are, but it is the best process that we have for ascertaining truth about the natural world. Perhaps don't be so dismissive of others and their profession and education. BTW I work with scientists, some of whom have saved literally millions of lives in Africa through vaccines that they developed there - scientists who could have become rich from their work but chose instead to help others.

Sorry, but you clearly do not understand what science is. And the claim that "every life is sentient" is circular because you are saying that all life is sentient and sentience is life. Finally, there is no evidence that primitive life, such as a bacterium, is sentient - any such claim is an absurd conjecture.

"Every living thing know what I'm talking about, the chatbot has no idea."

You are referring to sentient. That is not how scientists try to define life. Not all life is sentient - e.g. a bacterium is not sentient.

Hi - did you read my article?

What is "happiness"?

Be careful - the criteria might be met by a AI bot...

One can define "complex adaptive system", but "life" - no. And "sentient" is something else, but a lot of life is not sentient. Here is an article I wrote about this: https://medium.com/@cliffberg/...

Last night clocks went back to RETURN TO STANDARD TIME. Daylight savings time is what we had all summer.

And while we are all back to the office, now everyone around us is chattering all day long. No thanks.

Half the population has an IQ under 100. So the number sounds about right.

They would love to extend their snooping from the phone to the laptop.

That is a good point!