bascule

Things didn't get "really bad." You can talk about how things are "really bad" in terms of various economic indicators and I'll say they aren't because we don't have swathes of people waiting in line for soup and bread. That said, do you disagree that without TARP, things would be worse? I dislike when people bandy about the terms "bailout" in regard to Obama's economic recovery plan. We're talking about TARP, which is a separate piece of legislation, with its own respective set of pros and cons, and was passed under Bush, not under Obama. You of all people shouldn't be interchanging them (even admittedly) as if they're synonymous.

I like systems that are a hybrid of both, although I'm a sucker for vertically integrated platforms, like OS X or the iPhone.

You do realize that TARP passed at the same time as an international financial crisis was starting, right? I sense a bit of post hoc ergo propter hoc in your argument. Can you demonstrate why that's an effect of TARP, and not the financial crisis? What do you think that graph would've looked like if TARP hadn't passed? Would loans have been up, or would they, I don't know, have cratered amidst a complete collapse of the financial system.

I just note they weren't listed among your "indications of an artificial boom" I'm curious if you see the converse happening... the housing bubble was exacerbated by the creation of CDOs and the ability to sell mortgages as (increasingly risky) securities the more times they went through the "meat grinder" But it seems like your only bone to pick is with the Fed...

I'm somewhat reminded of the Eschaton AI from Charles Stross's Singularity Sky, who lives out a mysterious existence within its own light cone and only emerges to purge civilizations who choose to violate causality.

I don't mean to be rude, but is this a joke? If we hypothetically discover the ability to do something presently thought physically impossible it's proof of intelligent design. Zuh? Even if the universe is flush with humanoid life, that doesn't indicate intelligent design any more than it could indicate convergent evolution.

Looks awesome, albeit a bit "low level" for my tastes

If you ask me, this is definitely a states rights issue. Where in the Constitution is the federal government granted the power to regulate "substances" when they aren't crossing state lines? Especially when the federal law violates state law?

I don't really see a way for the Singularity to be "meh" other than it not happening.

Because he's a spambot and won't actually discuss his spam. It's just fire and forget. coberst, do you mind being banned? Just say you do and I'll at least reconsider my position

Screwed or golden, one of the two

Perhaps on "narrow AI" applications. The prerequisite work on "strong AI" happening in research institutions and private non-military corporations.

If I'm reading this correctly, you see the creation of CDOs as an effect of the financial crisis and not a cause.

http://blogs.usdoj.gov/blog/archives/192 Federal agents will now cede to states on the issue of medical marijuana, thanks to new orders under Obama. This is a complete 180 from the Bush years, when the executive decided to pursue federal action against medical marijuana providers who were acting under state law. Interesting to see where this will wind up going...

A phrase like "Antarctic Global Warming" is meaningless. The term "global warming" applies to an overall warming trend in the global mean surface temperature. You can't use the phrase when talking about a particular region. Are we seeing regional warming in the Antarctic? Not particularly.

Yes, it's really hard to say, however I really don't buy into the idea that AI will have a cold, calculating sense of morality.

Following our previous weekend of snow and 21°C, this weekend things jumped up to 27°C/80°F. Bright and sunny. A great day, really. We don't have fall; we just have alternating days of summer and winter.

One would hope morality is a trait common to all feeling, conscious beings, not just humans.

Well perhaps you can tell us your thoughts on CDOs.

Glad to see you have nothing of substance to offer to the conversation but only resurfaced to hurl insults.

It just goes to show economics isn't a science.

Wrong. We're sentient. We're capable of understanding anything, so long as it's explained clearly enough to us. The same cannot be said of dogs.

I think there are better ways that essential medicines could be funded other than a profit motive. The profit motive is a terrible way to fund research into cures for life threatening illnesses. It dictates the optimal solution is an ongoing treatment, not a cure. There are far more people out there with large amounts of money who have erectile disfunction than there are people with HIV. I think an interesting way to fund pharmaceutical research into life-threatening diseases would be a prize fund. Imagine if $1 billion were rewarded to the first firm to cure cancer. That would really be something.

Yes, I agree, hence why I changed it to "The government inspector is coming right now"

The amount people can communicate with each other versus what people can communicate with dogs is so vastly different I can't think of an appropriate metaphor. Think about how little dogs know about the world around them, versus what we know thanks to natural language.