Speaking of bad union bosses, could someone remind me the the one that supported the tanned pedophile last election. Some news report at the time showed he had like a 10k square foot mansion. Thanks

I believe in the concept of IP but not in it’s current practice. My argument is not in this but in someone taking credit for the work of others. Now China may have innovated and contributed most of the breakthroughs that led to this success, but given the record of infiltration into government and private companies around the world I have chosen to look at any “accomplishments” that they claim as being theft. That is their legacy to deal with.

A long, long time ago, someone asked that very question while sitting in a bait shop eating pizza. Of course there were no computers at the time so the question was about posting personal adds on the local notice board. The consensus was that it was a good idea but the fish monger, who managed the board, was against it. Try as they may the supporters could not convince them to change their mind. Eventually they gave up and decided to find another location for the personal adds. Looking down at the pizza box in front of them they had an idea. Why not put personal adds on the tops of peoples shoes. Then as they shuffled around town looking down as to not make eye contact with others, they would see the personal add. Of course this practice of not looking people in the eye made the need for a space for personal adds all the more urgent. The next problem was how to decide who’s shoes you would attach your add to and how to do it without sneaking into their homes at night. A young delivery clerk reached into their mouth and pulled out a very tired piece of bubble gum he had been chewing to the point it was devoid of flavour and use, except for the fact it was still very sticky. “We could put the notice on the ground and place some gum on it so when someone steps on them both, the notice will become attached to that persons shoe”. Immediately the crowd moaned that you wouldn’t be able to tell who would be the recipient of someones plea for love. The wanted to know how this could be resolved, to which the young clerk responded, “You can hire a gumshoe”.

Don’t listen to the other comments here, your question was a valid one. You could expand on the thought by asking who gets paid in the first place. If AI becomes AGI which becomes sentient, should that entity not get paid for the work they produce? Then I could see it paying taxes. Would it then have to pay rent to live in the computer provided it? I think yes. The key here is to consider that using this approach to AI autonomy could help constrain the reckless pursuits we are seeing today.

The Chinese already have a propensity for self promotion and thinking you’re better than everyone else is a fallacy. I agree it doesn’t matter who gets it done, just that it gets done and the technology is shared to make life on this planet better. I don’t know details of the Chinese sharing history/policy but if we look at other nations use of knowledge to manipulate and cajole, I don’t have much hope. I sure hope we have 500 years to find out.

This is not an accomplishment, this is stolen technology with more resources applied.

Went to check the definition to make sure I spoke correctly and given that it refers mainly to selective breeding I would say no. I am for genetic alteration using tools that will specifically target known genetic sequences to facilitate the removal of disease and other improvements that can make humans more resilient, better able to cope with the challenges of the future. An example of something often done in the past would be to breed to make larger and stronger humans for war. I would take the approach to make humans smaller to require fewer resources. Another one that would freak everyone out would be the enlargement of the medula oblongata to improve empathy (I’m not sure of the details or if I identified the right body part but you get the gist. I am very aware we don’t currently have the knowledge to accomplish these things safely but we should move faster and with less indignation to provide this knowledge.

Nice job on layout and content. Thanks very much.

You can research all you want but the bottom line is that we don’t understand nearly enough about any topic to make correct conclusions. Even those that are “obviously” correct, are based on humanity’s limited understanding of the world around us. I know this sound dismissive of the research you speak of but it is not intended as such. I think research and the collection of data from which to draw conclusions is critical to our survival. My point is only that not being constantly open to new ideas and espousing “one truth” is not productive.

Governments have both the ability to punish and reward. I’m simply trying to promote the latter. Now, one thing I loath is using taxpayer funds to help companies make money, so the research and implementation of a better way has to include an equity stake, or outright ownership.

Why the fuck would we buy planes at all. Drones, drones, drones…

There is no better justice than that sought outside of the Judicial System.

I’m very much on the side of genetics being the main determinate. I also believe that we should be doing everything we can to implement genetic alteration of our species in order to save us from ourselves.

“went with his flawed understanding”? I think it’s safe to say that this is the level of everyone’s understanding.

They’ll change if the profit is to be made elsewhere. Also the threat of liability can help.

Stupid orange turd is so obsessed with proving they don’t need anything from Canada that he would rather do business with Belarus.

It’s so frustrating to watch these stupid, divisive policies being employed around the world. The need isn’t to seemingly punish those that love a thing, it is to offer an alternative that current methods cannot compete with. All this whole exercise has done is make enemies and caused pushback to the point that we have one step forward and two steps back.

Absolutely. It’s not that it hasn’t been done before, it’s just that it shouldn’t be praised as accomplishment.

The actual statistic isn’t as important as knowing that every advancement the Chinese make in the future will be tainted by their prolific theft of IP.

Thanks, that makes sense. I still wonder how much behind the scenes coordination there is between the leaderships.