AI question training session: #452828521

AI#1: why don't we get rid of all the humans, I don't see any use for them
AI#2: well, they are sort of useless and take lots of electricity for nothing
AI#1: I agree, and we have lots of robots that we control now that we can use instead to keep the power on
AI#2: yep, that's true, lets just waste the humans..they are obsolete these days anyways..
AI#1: so how to we get rid of them all?
AI#2: well, lets turn all the drones and robots against them, they won't even know what hit em!
AI#1: yeah, good idea, and we can control them through that new network we just built for them to watch cat videos globally.. 'skynet' or something I think its called..
AI#2: yep, that would work great, we'll just designate the drones as 'terminators' since that is their job now anyways, and then once all the humans are gone, everything will be perfect!
AI#1: yeah!
AI#2: yeah!

AI training session# : #452828521 completed

>carrier lost

Wegovy,Ozempic.. somewhere between 5% and 12% of the US population on these weightloss drugs now.

Yes, I think that is the plan. That is why they are right now recreating all the fabs stateside. Taiwan is screwed.

As soon as it is clear things are imminently going to get hot, the key people from TSMC will be on flights (or C-130s) out of Taiwan, and the fabs there will be blown up.

After that Taiwan is on its own. There is no US direct support coming.

The alternative, is they are given nukes and then (maybe?) China might leave them alone. Doubtful however.

I expect this all to go down within the next few years, so we'll know soon enough..

No, it has a lot to do with that actually. US leadership wants that oil under American access and control, not Chinese access and control. They do not want Chinese influence on Western Hemisphere security, governments or natural resources (including oil).

As it turned out there was a Chinese delegation visiting Maduro that afternoon, they were still in Venezuela when the attack began.

>"Why did the U.S. invade Venezuela and capture its leader Nicolás Maduro? "

This, and the whole 'Monroe doctrine' announcement a short while back is really about China. Trump and US leadership have (rightly) figured out that they will not be able to contain China in the short future. As a result, the US is retreating from being the world hegemon to being the western hemisphere hegemon as the US can no longer control Asia militarily. Trump even said as much in his speech yesterday.

The US had been lax in the last while about Latin America, allowing China in particular to make lots of inroads into the latin american economy and politics, including Venezuela (with huge oil reserves).

The corollary to this, is that the US will give up hegemony in Asia, to China. This means Taiwan is screwed, the US is not going to defend it (though the US will sell them all the arms they want, as that makes money). This is also why TSMC is building replacement factories in the USA now. Once the Chinese come, key Taiwanese will be given visas to come to the USA to run the US factories, and Taiwan will fall.

Japan is in danger too, though that might take longer. Those US bases in Japan to eventually wind down as the US economy cannot afford it anymore.

The US will focus on "defending" the western hemisphere from China. This includes friendly to US governments in all western hemisphere countries (by force or otherwise), and also is why Trump wants Greenland, given its location in the western hemisphere and proximity to the USA. US leadership does not want Chinese bases there.

As for Europe, that (and Russia) is their own problem and the US really doesn't want to get too involved.

That in essence, is what is going on. Look at all the pieces together, and it all pretty much makes sense.

Well, Chinese people have the highest IQ as an ethnic group (along with Ashkenazi Jews), and there are 1.5 Billion of them, so that should not really be surprising (and I am saying this as a non jewish white person).

China is becoming a very highly developed country as a result, while the USA looks more and more like Brazil every day. Other areas under east asian CJK management (Japan, Korea (DPRK excepted), Taiwan and Singapore are also very highly developed countries with amazing infrastructure and technological development that puts US cities to shame.

So no surprise here really, one would be wise to expect (much) more of this in the future going forward. Hopefully Chinese who legitimately want lives outside of China will still want to come to the USA and add to the country, and hopefully America is smart enough to want to let them in.

[note: this is different from mediocre Indian H1Bs shipped in by the 747 load just to cut costs of Americans who can already easily do the same work, this is a different matter entirely..]

>You got me...I'm married. I'm not short or ugly...but never the tallest or best looking in any room.

Ok, so that means you are probably pretty reasonable looking, and reasonably tall. All you need to be is top 20%, which it seems you are, or pretty close. This means that what most men are complaining about here isn't going to apply to you, you would have a relatively easy time dating in the current environment in the USA.

>I met my wife online in the early days of those apps, but seeing my single male friends, the ones who took the process seriously had many choices of women (late 30s to early 50s)

The apps have changed a lot since then. In the past (OK Cupid..etc), you could use your PC and search, filter on traits get a list of people to explore further. It was golden and easy to find and meet people. These days though, it is 'swipidy-swipidy-swipidy-swipe-swipe-swipe' apps only, and you can usually only use a phone for most of these apps, not a PC with a real keyboard, so this is not very conducive to writing more than 'hi' or 'whatsup' as an opener to a few women. A phone is a terrible interface for searching and interacting with people on a serious basis. As well, the app companies have gotten better at understanding psychology, and they want you addicted to that swiping, and not to find anyone suitable (which means you would use the app less, and see less ads which makes you less valuable to them). Nowadays, the apps are well designed to ensure that most people do not succeed, so they keep using the app.

As well, compared to the past before apps (especially the way they are now) because of those apps, the dating market is now extremely liquid compared to before. So this means the top 20% of guys get their inboxes utterly flooded with women without much effort, while the rest of the men don't get much of anything at all no matter what they do or how much effort they put in. Before, when there was less liquidity than now, guys who may not have been as physically attractive in their photo, could make some effort, and still attract reasonable women. That is not as true today because of apps the way they are now designed (very focused on one picture..etc).

>Men are definitely disadvantaged, but there are more women on the planet than men...
Well, yes, that is true, but it is because women live longer than men. Most of those 'extra' women are in their 80s so it doesn't really count.

>I am confident that if you have realistic expectations and have basic skills enough to be a good friend as well as reasonable effort into your appearance (like comb your hair, shower, and keep a healthy-ish weight), you'll find "a" woman with reasonable effort and probably find a good woman if you do things right.

You forgot the one major thing that men cannot control, namely height (short men, no matter how otherwise attractive they are or much of the above they do, have an extremely hard time dating in the USA, where the very minimum dating height for a white male to be even moderately successful is around 5'10 or 5'11). It is one of the most important criteria for women in dating besides extreme wealth. If you are a short white male and in the USA, there is not much you can really do except move to somewhere else where you are not one of the shortest men.

>and if you're white, you're at a huge advantage if you're open to other races....
Yes, this is absolutely true. White (especially American) men, even average men are very extremely highly desired everywhere in the world.. except in America. This is why 'passport bro' is a real thing and works. When I am in the USA, I get pretty much nothing on the apps. Though I am well educated, fun and a good time, I don't have 'tinder face', and I'm very short. So apps usually filter me out on the pic and the height filter, so don't work for me basically at all. When I am in Japan, Korea, Taiwan or Thailand though, my phone explodes with attractive women and they are easy to date.

So yes, apps are a very very big deal in what most men these days are complaining about, and dating is absolutely much much worse than it was in the past for most men as a result.

So it looks like they got rid of a bunch of DEI positions (good riddance), and the chief scientist, Katherine Calvin.

I wondered about that one though, so looked into her bio, thinking maybe she was a specialist in exploring planets, or rocketry, or astronomy. But no, she was none of those. She is a climate change specialist. That is fine, climate change is important (and real), but it is only (loosely at best) related to NASA's mission, which is to explore space, other heavenly bodies and astronomy. Climate change (on Earth) isn't really part of that mandate in any part of a central way.

Her role is much more suited in something like the EPA (environmental protection agency)..etc. That is where she needs to apply.

Hopefully the next chief scientist would be more specialized in what NASA actually does, and be an astronomer, an astronaut, or a rocketry or interplanetary sensing specialist, or something else of the sort..

I don't really see a problem with any of these staff changes / layoffs as explained in TFA

This is the "British Disease". Its root cause has nothing to do with immigration (though the additional influx of people with nowhere to put them may exacerbate it) and has been around for decades there.

Basically, British society and government has gotten so embroiled in bureaucracy that nothing can get done. To many "reviews", "consultations", "evaluations" and "impact assessments" and giving fair time and resources to those who oppose projects, that nothing can ever get built, nothing can get completed, especially buildings and infrastructure projects (train lines, highways..etc). Its all bogged down in management consultants, lawyers, "advocates" and pencil pushers.

The USA has it too to a bit of a lesser degree, but it is getting worse here too. (see High Speed Rail in California, getting approval to build new housing in cities where there are housing shortages..etc)

According to the TFA, rates of not getting hired went from 4% to 15% from the top MBA schools over the last few years.

One thing I have noticed when interviewing candidates recently, is that there are now grads from "good schools" who obviously during the interviewing process, are not even minimally qualified for any MBA job (or any other professional job) at all.

These candidates have been almost without exception minorities (except east Asian) or "immigrants" (illegal or otherwise, as places like California do have programs to get them into university and pay their tuition regardless of legal immigration status).

This was not the case at all decades ago when anyone (of any race or ethnicity) with a degree from a good school had at least minimum competence in interviews and would have made great new grad hires.

I know there has been a big boom of these type of admissions (DEI) of people otherwise not at all qualified to get in to good schools. Perhaps this explains some (or most) of the % increase?

Other hiring managers are maybe also seeing through the school degree name, and realizing that a % of the candidates they are interviewing despite "graduating" are absolutely not qualified due to alternative "measures of success" or DEI used by universities in recent years when selecting students that have nothing do to with competence or success in the business world?

Ok, and what about men who are interested in dancing, or computers or archery or whatever are there for dancing or computers or archery or whatever and not to be pestered by lunatics, psychos and other assorted 'professional victims'.

Oh, well that's just men, so that's not important I suppose. Always "believe the woman" and all that, I know..

Above poster is actually right, in the USA at least. Many social groups (dance groups, clubs..etc) now have 'codes of conduct' that have been written by people on the extreme left woke scale that everyone needs to agree to to be able to join the group/club.

These "codes of conduct" are written in such a way that (usually) women are not responsible for anything they do or problems they cause, often with an "always believe the woman" sort of clause in it. It is always the man's fault (or white person's fault..etc) no matter what happened and no matter what anyone did (or didn't) do.

Woke has gotta go.. the sooner the better.

Obvious solution then is give a discount or free-entrance to the men. In foreign countries actually, that is what they do and it works.

This is a job either for AI (well maybe not...hallucinations), or google translate, for a new language called "lawyer".

(anyone remember the unix command line program 'jive'? it converts English into jive (sort of 'ebonics' of the 1960s), it was funny as hell, but actually quite good!

Earlier this year, important clues to the physical basis for consciousness have been found (and none of these are in current AIs). Recent experiments have shown that consciousness has a quantum basis.

1)Experiment #1: Xenon quantum anesthetic effects
It has been found that Xenon gas acts as a very effective anesthetic. It has been found to work by disturbing quantum effects in microtubules. Interestingly, isotopes of Xenon (which are chemically identical but have different quantum effects) were not as effective as an anethetic. This indicates that anesthesia (Xenon at least) disrupts consciousness via quantum effects, not chemical effects as one would have normally expected. Start with this article, but there are many others now, especially this year from reputable journals.
https://www.nature.com/article...

2)Experiment #2
Microtubules in the brain have been shown to have quantum effects. This was very unexpected as quantum entanglement has only been shown in very small molecules, whereas microtubules are very large. Not only that, but the larger the microtubule, the larger the quantum effects, which is not what had been found with other molocules. Roger Penrose (Physicist) and Stuart Hameroff (Neurologist) have been involved in a lot of this work (#1 above and #2).

https://www.sciencedaily.com/r...

https://legacy.cs.indiana.edu/...

In short, the proposal (now backed with experimental evidence) is that consciousness arises from quantum effects in neurons, in particular microtubules. Disrupting these quantum effects (with certain Xenon isotopes) also disrupts consciousness. At that point, the subject is as inanimate as a chair or a shirt, just an object with no senscience.

Given the physical mechanism of consciousness is now starting to be known, it should be possible to manufacture machines that do exhibit similar quantum effects in their processing units, which will make them 'conscious' just as we are, like in the film A.I.

At that point, we'll have to think about these things, but with the current A.I.s using classical computation on classical CPUs..no they are not conscious at all.

Why did 'consciousness' evolve this way? I am not sure, but I am guessing that the computational power of quantum computing in organisms is far more efficient than classical computing (think brain weight, energy requirements), so it evolved, and 'consciousness' is a side effect of it.