Jedi_Nephite

I’m not against vaccinations in general, but I think people should be cautious about what type of vaccinations they are  having injected into their children.  Some vaccinations are necessary, some are not.  And some should be avoided.  But if COVID taught us anything, it’s that the medical community cannot be trusted.

This attempt to justify violence and the destruction of property is not persuasive.  The fact that any group of humans contains elements that can be whipped into a fervor and pointed at a target, does not mean that the LA riots were some sort of moral thing.
 
 
Liberal guilt over privilege, demonizing the word and forming it into a weapon to be used against those who have it, is also not persuasive.   My people were once forced out of their homes at gunpoint and made to trek across the plains in a winter that killed 1 out of every 12 refugees.   My wife's ancestry includes a slave (the little Indian girl bought by a family of Saints who had settled in Utah), and slaveowners (the members of the various Ute tribes who raided each other for children to sell to the Saints).  Closer to the present, my grandfather lost everything in the great depression, and left my young teen dad as the oldest male to care for a family while he rode the rails looking for work.  My Dad & his mom and siblings moved a lot trying to find food - Utah, Kansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico - literally starving at times - only potatoes for days on end at times - only one pair of clothes.  And I was once forced at knifepoint to recant my religion.  I was once pushed against a set of lockers by a guy who showed me his knife and said "I cut mormons - are you a mormon?"   Me, my dad, my grandpa: 3 generations of honest law-abiders, striving for a better future.  They had to deal with those who tried to cut corners and break laws back then too.  There have always been people who figure the laws shouldn't apply to them.  People willing to do violence to get what they want. 
No, you don't get to use the word "privilege" against me, pal.  The United States of America is one of, if not the greatest nations out there when we're measuring who can work their way into earned privilege.   Again, you're as familiar with social media as I am - I suggest again that you go find the ever-growing numbers of legal immigrants who are supporting the deportation efforts, and go argue with them.
 
I've said it before and I'll say it here again - you and yours haven't learned a single thing since T took the election with nationwide gains in almost every category.  It's not that T and the cops won't stand for it, Americans won't stand for it.  Your lawlessness and rioting will be put down, and every thrown brick turns into another 1000 Americans supporting more deportations.   Your basic attitude of "I don't condone it but I won't shed any tears over it, and besides, it's useful for change" is widespread across the political left.  And y'all seem hell-bent on losing the next decade's worth of elections over the issue.   Go for it. 
 
 
Yeah, MLK was a heck of a guy.  Guess what else he said: 
"Every summer we are going to have this kind of vigorous protest. My hope is that it will be nonviolent.  I'm hoping we can avoid riots because riots are selfish and socially destructive."
"I'm here to say tonight that if every negro in the United States turns against nonviolence I'm gonna stand up as a lone voice and say this is the wrong way!"
"The basic idea that nonviolence is the most potent weapon available to the negro in his struggle for freedom and justice.  I think for the negro to turn to violence would be both impractical and immoral."
Again, once the fires start, once the protests turn into riots, once the rocks or bricks or water bottles are thrown - you lose.   Especially after the riots of 2021 are recent enough in people's memories, and the results were basically failed cultural reform efforts like DEI and Kendi's stupid antiracism.  
 
So, the various -isms have had what, 150 years to work across the planet?  There are -isms that have resulted in the worst atrocities, and there is capitalism.  The phrase is "the least horrible choice".   When paired with a representative republic and a constitution which mandates a limited government, separation of powers, and the notion of govt by consent, there have been zero worst atrocities.  
Holocaust?  Nazis (aka the National Socialist German Workers' Party.  The "Nationalsozialists".)
The Armenian Genocide that killed 1.5 million?      A coup that paired a dictatorship with ethnic nationalism.
The Rwandan Genocide that killed around .8 million?   Ethnic genocide carried out by a government that engaged in state control of the economy that favored the Hutus over the Tutsis.
The Cambodian Genocide and it's almost 2 million dead?  Communists seeking to transform Cambodia into a classless society based on their interpretation of Marxist-Leninist ideology. 
The Great Chinese Famine that killed somewhere between 15-45 million?    A result of the Great Leap Forward.  More Communists trying to transform China from an agrarian society into a socialist society through rapid industrialization and collectivization.
The Soviet Gulags that killed between 1.5 and 2 million?  The Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics.

The 1-2 million deaths in India starting in the late '40's might be your best chance lay stuff like this at the feet of a developed capitalist nation.   Britain is maybe 40% to blame, initiating the partition and then granting everyone their freedom and bailing on the whole scene as all the factions that had been kept at bay descended on each other.  Ghandi tried hard, and he wasn't the only person preaching nonviolence, but it wasn't in the cards in that place. 
But the US isn't 1940's India.  It's not like anyone is howling for blood (except for the growing numbers of leftists supportive of executing CEOs and assassinating presidents and burning down the system in the name of fighting fascism and racism).  But apart from them, it's not like the white christian businessmen or McD's employee are howling to snuff out immigrants.   We get to be a nation of laws, governed by consent of the people, with an executive branch enforcing laws passed by the legislative branch, and the judicial branch either giving T the green light or a smack down, depending on the particulars.   
Porous borders are a threat to this nation.  Illegal immigration chews up lives and creates misery in the people seeking a better life.   Human trafficking sucks.  Child sex slavery sucks.  Bad actors using open borders to smuggle humans, drugs, weapons across it must stop.  Tall walls, wide well-guarded gates, robust immigration policies, humanitarian efforts, and punishing offenders.  All of that is just, moral, and good. 
Win or lose your next election as you see fit. I don't see defending temper tantrums and yelling about privilege as a path to it, but you do you.

Just so we're clear, I'm not countering anything you're suggesting. (I'm not supporting it, per se, either. Just...commenting.)

The thing is... the dangers of (air-quotes) A.I. (air-quotes) are not, at present, what everyone believes they will be. Everyone thinks it's some form of the terminator. Well...maybe someday. But that's not what the current danger is.. The dangers of AI is that AI is a big freaking lie that's turning the business world upside down...based on a lie.
The lie is, as always, wealth. "A.I. will make you rich!"
But NO ONE is going to get wealthy from A.I. except those peddling A.I. and its related support system (computing power). Well, and the dirtbag traders and execs who will sell A.I. to their companies, get big bonuses, and then move on to another lucrative career.
None of that is actually related to the first comment I made about A.I. not existing yet. More related to the video I just posted.
But it's related... in that even calling it A.I. is a lie. It's not. It's not intelligent in any way, shape or form. Not artificially or otherwise.

We think we're experiencing "intelligence" in the way that Hollywood has portrayed A.I. But we're not. Not even close. At best we're seeing some artificial artificial intelligence. Maybe that's argumentative in an unnecessary way. But not really. Like I said...it's marketing.
Don't get me wrong. There's value in some of what we are experiencing. Not monetary value. Not for most. But it's a nice tool. As a developer, for example, I like that when I google (or bing or whatever) the syntax for some code I can't quite recall, that instead of having to click on the Stack Overflow link, I get an AI Overview (that's basically stolen the info from Stack Overflow), which has been "summarized" for me. That makes my search a bit quicker. Nice. And I like that when I shop on Amazon that when I go to the reviews there's an "A.I." summary of the reviews. Nice.

But neither of these things, once again, are in any way "intelligent", artificially or otherwise.
It's just branding for basic algorithms that have been running for half a century in some form or another. Guess what. That's what computers do! All of a sudden it's being touted as "A.I.". Why? Money and the promise of money.

It drives me nutty. There's only a very few applications of the tech that even pretend to be intelligent, as in artificially "thinking". The chat engines for one.

Even the art generation...which is nifty and fun...but...is it "intelligent"? Since when is automated replication of something or another "intelligent"? And, moreover,.... I'm pretty intelligent. But I can't do that. My brother can. He's not more intelligent than I am. He's trained artist that's learned skills. But the ability to paint a face that looks like a face instead of a scribble isn't exactly intelligence. I mean...it's tied into intelligence. The ability to learn and to assess and remember. So at least the art stuff can, sort of, fit the classification of A.I.... sort of.
But so much the other stuff out there being called A.I.? Nope. It's just the new thing to call stuff. It's like, for example....cameras autofocused for fifty years, but now anything like that is "intelligent". And everyone's freaking out because a camera is "thinking" for itself? Yes...I'm using a simple example and tech has advanced and what cameras or the like do is more complex now. But it's essentially the same thing. It's like calling the starter on your vehicle intelligent. "You mean it...starts the car? By itself? All I have to do is push this button!? Wow! Well, there goes humanity." Another more realistic example is the writing suggestion tools from Word or Grammarly or the like. They've done that forever. But now it's called A.I. The spell checker is A.I. now. Oh no. We're doomed.
The real danger, in things like that, is when all the companies needing photography fire all qualified photographers because the camera is smart enough by itself, and then wonder why their photography magazine nose dives. But, hey...maybe, eventually, the camera will be smart enough. Except, I forgot...we don't need cameras at all now. Just a few prompts.
C'est la vie.

If I were to sing the National Anthem in public, it would cause everyone to embrace hearing loss.

If I were to sing the National Anthem in public, it would cause everyone to embrace hearing loss.

I seem to have the opposite problem.  I have difficulty stretching my talks into 20 minutes when I can make my point in about 10.  

I seem to have the opposite problem.  I have difficulty stretching my talks into 20 minutes when I can make my point in about 10.  

The newest feline member of our family.  8 week old female.  We’re still trying to decide on a name, though.
Update: We decided to name her Zelda.
 

Thank you!
The other kitten (Hobbes, who will be a year old in May, so not so much a kitten anymore), is very curious about her.  Of course, he had to show her who’s top cat around here.  He follows her around constantly and pounces her frequently, but never hurts her.  But today he started giving her a bath.  

The newest feline member of our family.  8 week old female.  We’re still trying to decide on a name, though.
Update: We decided to name her Zelda.
 

Oh, she's way, way too cute!! That's a heart-breaker right there. Hope she gets along well with the other kitty(ies?).  Congratulations!  Great way to celebrate the giver of all life.

The newest feline member of our family.  8 week old female.  We’re still trying to decide on a name, though.
Update: We decided to name her Zelda.
 

The newest feline member of our family.  8 week old female.  We’re still trying to decide on a name, though.
Update: We decided to name her Zelda.
 

If you want an expensive hobby, try getting into ham radio.  That can drain your bank account very quickly.

If you want an expensive hobby, try getting into ham radio.  That can drain your bank account very quickly.

If you want an expensive hobby, try getting into ham radio.  That can drain your bank account very quickly.

I was raised in the Church, and was always taught that those who do not have the opportunity to receive the blessings of eternal marriage in this life, will do so in the next life.  And, yes, one must be sealed to a spouse to enter the highest degree of glory in the Celestial Kingdom; however, if one does not have that opportunity during their mortal probation, they will have that opportunity in the next life, so long as they are worthy.

As a practical matter, because our leaders are not paid, the relatively affluent are the ones that have the ability to serve in positions that demand a lot of their time. 
Think of this:  when most people their age are spending time on golf courses, the GAs are serving mankind. 

Someone’s always playing corporation games….

I’m disappointed.  I thought this thread was going to be about some people who built a city.

Um, AI would request what sort of rolls...

The pigeons might also be a problem.

Ah, but now I'm imagining a city built of rolls...  Yummm!  Edible buildings....  I recommend not buying above the first floor, lest your rooms collapse when the cinnamon roll you were built on gets eaten...

You can build a city on rocks, but not on rolls.