You make it sound like exoplanets are not planets, but they are, unless you have a recent source that contradicts my education.
I try to contribute to things getting better, sometimes through polite rational skepticism.
Disagreeing with your comment ≠ supporting the opposite side, I support rationality.
Let’s discuss to refine the arguments that make things better sustainably.
Always happy to question our beliefs.
You make it sound like exoplanets are not planets, but they are, unless you have a recent source that contradicts my education.
I’m not blaming the single person who did a mistake, I’m blaming the negligence of the companies that cut corners for profit, so most of them.
Your first comment read as if organizations where this happens couldn’t have bad consequences. Your new comment explains what you meant better, and I agree.
Need a new survival craft game where you can tame isopods to collect precious metals.
Ok, people will always fuck up, so what do you do?
The majority of industries that actually have immediate and potentially fatal consequences do exactly this, and have been for more than a generation now.
All the organizations (including public) getting ransomware and data stolen, it’s because the consequences are not that bad? It is not gross negligence?
They tend to be one-hit wonders.
What annoys me with this culture is when they expect foreigners to use the same exhuberant language and they think something is wrong with you if you don’t.
I feel like it means: we are not like Nintendo, we make video games for adults (and children who want to play like adults).
2001 especially.
Left or right is an economic stance
What about the social stance?
What’s the reference to Brandon Sanderson?
Sounds good philosophically, but I can’t help but feel like it could turn into a dystopia.
Who will be in charge of defining what is to be considered true, and what should be known by the accused? Who will be able to challenge this truth giver?
How do you make the difference between false information out of ignorance and willfully misleading information?
Out of fear, will every politician, even honest ones, be forced to introduce their speech with some precautionary standard phrase like “This is fully based on assumptions and the truth of those statements cannot be guaranteed” like people say “I am not a lawyer”, eventually putting every political intention on an equal level of uncertainty? (That’s standard troll farm goal)
I believe this job currently belongs to journalism, although we know how imperfect that is, will a law and a Justice system do better?
Right, I wanted to avoid saying AI but didn’t pick the right one, I am switch to gen-ML.
You need to upgrade buddy, you should send LLM gen-ML generated pictures of you traveling the world, or add yourself as a ghostly/cadaveric appearance in social media pictures of your relatives.
Wouldn’t they have this kind of prediction every other week due to the intense threat, but this one happened to be true? If that’s the case, it is a bit easy to come after the fact and say that this one should have been considered better than the 20 others.
European countries, for example, are constantly getting attacked, even if it’s rarely big enough to be noticed in the current times.
In 2022, 16 terrorist attacks took place in the EU and an additional 12 attacks failed or were foiled. https://www.europol.europa.eu/cms/sites/default/files/documents/European Union Terrorism Situation and Trend report 2023.pdf
It would be the same if China has already caught up enough to have some know-how to transfer. Has it?
Did you edit the saturation artifacts at the top?