Rhaedas

Calvin Ball. Since he’s so prone to making up rules as he goes.

I rarely downvote unless it’s an obvious troll. I’ve always seen downvotes as meaning not related to the topic, not a negative opinion. If it’s worth engaging I’ll introduce my own take and why I think they’re wrong. For discussion purposes, as that’s why I’ve always been on such places starting back when they were called discussion boards. I will upvote for something I agree with, but for the purpose of it hopefully seeing more light. I’ll comment on it as well, trying to avoid just a “me too”, although sometimes I think my longer comment may as well be that sometimes. I try to bring something new if I can.

My biggest problem is that I engage so much in the topic and comments I often forget to upvote the main post. I hope anything I do within has the same effect. In theory more comments helps, right?

I guess we need to take the power back. Someone should write a song.

That has its own slope of discrimination from data due to being able to pay or not. If we determine a certain thing is okay ethically to screen for, anyone should be able to get it. Bad enough to have one gray area, we don’t need a gradient of gray everywhere.

My first question was, why is this a target? This is terrorism and outside war rules (insane that we have rules for war instead of just not having it). Laws are only as good as their enforcement though.

Are you talking about murder? Because if anything legal morality is far better than most religious when it comes to killing people. And that’s even with capital punishment still practiced.

We’ve approached the time where the meaning of laws is more of a guideline towards our own actions. A law without official enforcement is just words on paper.

11 counts of it.

But someone assessed they were still a valid target, right? We aren’t quite at the fully autonomous attack craft yet, are we? That would be a convenient excuse, blaming the AI/drone because the humans in charge totally wouldn’t have done that. Totally. Especially knowing it would be found out by the world.

Enough buyouts and the parent can have creative acronyms.

That’s an interesting thought. Are mergers usually bad overall? Would it be better for the assets and workers to just be lost? I do think monopolies are bad simply because of the domination of control and the loss of competition, but if X and Y are two of many companies and Y is failing, why is it bad for X to save some of the parts of Y to incorporate it into their own? Maybe there should be limitations and regulations on how much can be done and to what?

I don’t even know the right questions to ask, I just thought the idea was interesting in its absoluteness, and wondered if it might be too simple to say no merging or buying at all.

L. I. B. M. R. Ducks.

I knew someone in high school who had a hard cover copy of the book with the design, and inside at one particular point the text changes color as it describes everything. No spoilers, if you’ve read it you know. I don’t recall if the movie had that exact scene. Also don’t know if every copy of the book does that, but being what it was, it was surreal, as it was meant to be.

I doubt such a law is a linear function, and probably plateaus at some point. I wouldn’t consider large birds even outside raptors as weak because they are big, and dinosaurs? Maybe clarify what you mean as “less powerful”.

Even outside the bird family, what about huge animals like orca, elephants, rhinos?

You’re correct on their limitations. That doesn’t stop corporations from implementing them, sometimes as an extra tool, sometimes as a rash displacement of paid labor, and often without your last step, checking the results they output.

LLMs are a specialized tool, but CEOs are using it as a hammer where they see nails everywhere, and it has displaced some workers. A few have realized the mistake and backtracked, but they didn’t necessarily put workers back. As per usual anytime there is displacement.

And for the record, while LLMs are technically under the general AI classification, they are not AI in the sense of what the term AI brings to the mind (AGI). But they have definitely been marketed as such because what started as AI research turned into a money grab that is still going on.

Little birds are so cute. Then you observe them going after their prey, imagine if they were larger, and then remember their ancestry. Yeah, they’re cute.

The second strike was murder. But so was the first strike. Even if they were running drugs, this is not how you handle the situation. If the only solution is to blow it up, then you’re looking for a reason to shoot at things, and the second attack proves that.

This is no different than the police problem we have domestically, where shoot first, don’t bother asking questions later because they’re dead is too common.

Great additions. And the biggest Imperial vulnerability remained the same as it had always been throughout. Cassian points this out in an early episode - they’re so full of themselves being the Empire that you can just walk in if you blend in. They can’t imagine someone having the balls to do that. Even in late RotJ we see that, the trick to open the door to the shield control. Of course someone with a walker is going to be them, telling them to open up. Who else could it be? Arrogant to the end. Hell, Palpatine at that point, even after him devising this plan for so long and right under the Jedi, is so proud and sure of himself at the end. He has foreseen it all, and how could these rebel insects win now?

And I mean he’s almost right. He’s just not paying attention to minor details.

In the original movie we see them devastate the rebels when capturing the ship. We see Obi-Wan mention that the shots on the jawa transport are too accurate for sand people so they must be Imperial. We see a lot of missed shots as they escape, but as you said and as Leia herself noted, they got away far too easily.

And then there’s Rogue One/Andor that shows the true side. Andor kicked scary up a notch for even the base stormtrooper.