1. It's foreign. This should be enough. It is from a half-Arabic people in the middle east. This is both racist and ethnocentric. You take a serious credibility hit starting with this.

2. It's dualistic. Symbolic Heaven plays by different rules than Earth, causing people to reject reality. This is schizophrenia. You're forgetting about Hell. Besides, most people place heaven elsewhere, as in not here. Your view of a priori rejection of reality is just one of many ways to look at it, all valid.

3. It's exoteric. The idea that normal people can understand religion forces a constant dumbing down. It's inclusive: Smart, inspired, dumb as a fence post; they take anybody. The ones who are smart get to study all they like, even become a priest (ok, they are sexist). People who aren't smart or intrested enuf still take comfort in the rituals, which does provide benefit regardless of the metaphysical aspect's truth value.

4. It's universalist. It rejects hierarchy, except from the church of course. Don't conflate political and religious leaders. Christianity is by far the biggest religion on the planet. Yet they still respect other religion's rights and treat their religious caste with respect (mostly, some humans just suck). They pay attention to the religious hierarchy, but consider themselves outside the political hierarchy.

I am not at all christian; my beliefs are fairly radical actually. I honestly think the lessons we could learn from christianity are so deeply ingrained at this point (Ten Commandments for instance) that they are moot; simply assumed to be true as a way of behaving in society. We're stuck on the religio/philosophical equivalent of pre-newtonian physics. Reality is best viewed via a scientific perspective, but that isn't enuf. Humans need more. It will take awhile, but we will grow beyond our current confusion.

Krebs is based in Russia. It doesn't matter how vehemently they deny it, they are beholden to Putin. I agree with your intent, we should focus more on preventing and prosecuting cybercrime, but this is more vigilantism. Do you really want to fly your flag on this particular example?

Within a few years, it will seem like it. We are even likely to invent moral and ethical guardrails for more convincing behavior.

Those who understand it will be able to exploit and break it with ease.

Actually conscious general AI will need fundamental breakthroughs that are not possible to predict.

If the bios is how you change it, then you should install grub on the boot sector of the windows drive. I don't know enough about grub to tell you how to fix it, but the installer for most distros will let you do it when installing to another drive.

They are right in that giving them free reign with copywrites will speed up AI training, and not doing so may give an advantage to competitors and adversaries. However, just because it is strategically the "right thing to do" doesn't make it the ethical, or actually right, thing to do.

When they start putting these on the road at scale, plenty of new bugs will surface. Whether it involves safety or just inconvenience, there will be situations where the car needs to be moved when the autonomous part isn't cooperating. There will be a need for human operated controls, sooner than a tow truck can get there. I don't care if it fits the aesthetic of an autonomous car, manual controls belong there for at least 5 more years, preferably 10 or more.

A good blast of nootropics gives me artificial(ly enhanced) intelligence. Does that count?

Never played Fischer Chess, but Monster Chess is a lot of fun.

Nice cherry picking of info to support your claim. The very next sentence after your quote refutes your position: "Stetson Flower Garden Banks Benthic_Covage Monitoring 1993-2018 -- OBIS Event," another NOAA dataset, can no longer be found on data.gov and also appears to have been deleted from the internet. I'd still think most of this is bit-rot and not intentional. If the obscured data points to an organized campaign to suppress truth or people, then we have a problem. The article doesn't provide that proof, even though that is the windmill you are tilting at. So yes, this is mostly conspiracy theory. Given the larger picture, it certainly fits what Trump is doing, so it wouldn't really be a surprise if true either. He's got a seriously intricate game plan this time around. There's some very serious changes about to hit the fan.

I can think of 2 good reasons. The light is built in, so it would have to be easily retrieved from the roof, which means it is open to theft too. But more importantly, this gives the kids ownership, not the homeowner or parents. The kids will get to study more, which is the purpose.

Your assumptions here are false. Any hardware that can run windows 7 will run better on linux. Yes, modern flavors of linux. You only lose the "modern" part if you go 32-bit, which windows won't even boot. Linux also has better legacy hardware support for odd drivers that modern windows has dropped.

I still use a program I wrote last century with Visual Basic 1.0. It runs fine under wine; Microsoft's OS hasn't supported it in decades. Wine also runs most of the original "Windows Entertainment Pack" games like Minesweeper, Jezzball, many card games, and Wordzap. You are too deep into Windows, with its jolting changes between versions that require a whole new learning curve. Try the smooth rolling hills of Linux: Once you know the basics, all flavors are easy to try out and become familiar with. Then you can find the one that you are comfortable with rather than the One Corporate Interface of windows.

Putting all those important documents in one place makes exfiltrating them SO much easier! Just like a password manager; make it easier for the real hackers to get the important stuff while appearing to be good security against casual intrusions. Fools make easier targets I guess. (Yes, password managers are great, until someone copies your manager's database. Then they can take their time and break in to get ALL of them, and you may not even know the copy occurred. I know people are gonna flame me for this but I saw it happen.)

It would shake things up a bit if Apple bought them. They are on a big push to bring chip fabs in-house. But my money is on Dell or Oracle. HP and IBM have the ability, but I don't see them being agile enough to pull it off. Bezos could too, if he wanted to get into tech manufacturing; it just doesn't seem his style.

My comment is marked 5 Insightful. Yours is -1. You are only fooling yourself. I don't personally dislike you. Sorry you became a target of my beefs with slashdot.

Personal insults do not make a good discussion, nor even any valid points. I never said they have to agree with me.