According to the Iranians, JCPOA wasn't working. Part of that could have been because congress didn't ratify it.

What are you talking about? You can literally hack Mac OS for whatever reason you want.

This is why I don't own a Playstation. I am only one person, but I still count as much as anyone else.

Once again showing that you don't understand the industry, despite your earlier claim to be working in the field. You are a liar. You have been weighed, measured and found wanting.

You are liar who lies, who writes lies, and will lie until you die. What a pity, you lying liar.

Putin indeed seems rational, but America and Russia are not the only nuclear countries that have been engaging in military attacks recently.

If you actually work in the field, you are an executive, not a knowledge worker, because that is who your posts admire.

You don't know more than this kid because your posts have not shown any knowledge. And, this entire post is a logic fail.

FTFY https://www.bbc.com/news/artic...

Oh yeah? You think Sam Altman is in a position to understand what is going on, more than an engineer who is actually working on these things?

Sam Altman is worse than a nobody, he's a liar.

It seems you are responding to this quote from the PR person:

It is impossible to know from this sentence what exactly the model did. Maybe it unplugged the server from the wall, we don't know!

ChatGPT says the government in the US has killed 5 protestors in the last 50 years.

Wikipedia has a list of all police killings in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

This sentence is very clearly a PR communication designed to obscure the event of what actually happened.

We have war every generation because leaders have forgotten how horrible war can be. It SHOULD be avoided. Putin, Trump, and Xi have never known that (unlike JFK, Bush Sr, or Stalin), and are too anxious to approach the brink. Xi has been consolidating power, even killing people who thought the invasion of Taiwan should be delayed.

Now is objectively the best time for Xi to attack (that doesn't mean it's a good time, it means the US is at its likely weakest point and a similar opportunity will not present itself). It's been widely reported that US air defense missiles are running low, and production is ramping up. Every year that passes, Japan, the Philippines, Taiwan and Korea become stronger and anti-drone defense will remove China's temporary drone advantage. America is distracted in Iran and Ukraine, but that window of opportunity will end, and American military power will focus on the far east. Now is the window, and the time to strike is when the US is maximally entangled in Iran (ie, when it becomes apparent that the US can't become more entangled).

All of that is non-controversial. The question is whether Xi actually chooses to move militarily, then we are in WW3. A sample scenario could be like this:

1) At their meeting next week, Xi tells Trump to stay away from Taiwan (and the south China sea) or they will let nukes fly. (You don't attack us, we don't attack you).

2) The PLA encircles Taiwan, and moves to take control of the Philippines west of the 116th meridian east.

3) The world can't believe what happened. After a period of deliberation, the US sinks their navy.

4) The blockade is broken, but rather than confront the US directly, they send a nuke to Japan in the desolate area northwest of Kyoto.

In any case, the time period for testing this hypothesis runs out a little while after the Iran war ends (ideally, at the point when it becomes obvious that the US will not become more deeply entangled, but China may miss the exact timing and still choose to move, so the hypothesis extends some months after that point, with decreasing probability as each day passes).

The Halloween Documents gave Microsoft's stretegy to Embrace/Extend/Extinguish applied to open source.

I feel like he's been hinting at doing a ground invasion of Iran after the election, but it doesn't take much strategic thinking to do the unpopular stuff after an election.

In any case, it's a convenient hypothesis because it's easy enough to test, just have to wait a few months and we'll know. Don't even need to set up a double-blind to be sure.

Wow, the 1800s called and want their critique of scientific research back.

Fundamental research with no immediate payback has led over and over to discoveries that have real practical benefits, including nearly everything in this computer. Even Thomas Edison, who was mainly a practical inventor, was willing to investigate properties of electronics that operate in transistors, even if there was no obvious application at the time.