zapatos

Are you saying there is no definition that the President can look to? If not, how can we expect him, or any other commander anywhere in the world, know if he/she can order some action? If I am a colonel commanding troops somewhere in Africa and I feel under threat, is Congress required to be consulted prior to me taking action? Without some understanding of exactly how a declaration of war is defined I can't see how you can possibly make the judgement that Trump did not have the authority to authorize the strike due to the Constitution granting the right to declare war to Congress. So as the hypothetical colonel somewhere in Africa and with no previous authorization from Congress, I cannot order a defense of my position without consulting with Congress first, else I've usurped their authority. When did Congress make this declaration? Is it a law?

If you stop the fires, how will that impact that which is dependent on fire? Is the impact an acceptable tradeoff to the benefits of limiting fire?

How do you define "declaration of war"? Does violence or death have to be involved? Any minimum number of people involved? Is blowing up equipment with no loss of life a declaration of war? If you kill others while being attacked (such as at the embassy) is that a declaration of war? Is there some time frame in a defensive response involved? If the killing of Soleimani was a defensive act, is that a declaration of war? "War" as in the common vernacular generally involves large operations (WW!, WW2, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, 1812, etc.) Not many people categorize the killing of a handful of individuals to be "war". If that were the case, then probably every country in the world has declared war on one country or the other countless times in the last decade. Sorry but I'm not familiar with that rule. Can you please give me a little more detail?

What specifically in the Constitution gives this authority to Congress?

The thing that makes this situation different for you and I versus Trump, is that we have a structure in place to adjudicate whereas leaders of countries do not. The UN and World Court are dependent upon cooperation of the correct parties, whereas state adjudication is already a mature system. There was zero chance of bringing Soleimani before a court of law, and when you do not have a judicial system in place, people make their own judicial system. Allowing Soleimani to continue in his efforts would have been just as profound a decision as killing him. It is unfortunate that at the state level we often have people of questionable ability making such profound decisions, but that is the current state our world is in. I don't know if Trump's decision was good or bad, but I feel that by taking on the role of President, it was his decision to make.

What I'm suggesting is that regulations may make an inherently more dangerous vehicle safer to operate. Your example of limiting their speed to 30mph would be an example of a regulation making up for a weakness in an AI vehicle. A real life example is the regulation of truck drivers to ensure an inherently more dangerous vehicles (18 wheelers for example) are operated more safely, thus making the overall use of tractor-trailers a reasonably safe vehicle system.

That seems to be a reasonable expectation. And while these cars may not have definitively been proved safer than human driven vehicles, I also don't see where they have definitively been proven less safe than human driven vehicles, which is what it seemed you were implying. Regulations for AI cars may be quite different than those for human driven cars, just as commercial trucks and taxis have different regulations. The car itself may not have to be 'safer', or even as safe, as long as the overall environment meets safety expectations.

With all due respect, this is scienceforums, not yourgutinstinctforums.

Try not to be such a prick.

I suspect it is a combination of many factors. Many people who claim to be right actually believe they are right. And if you believe you are right, then why not claim it with certainty? Lack of training in objective thinking, either through lack of education or lack of training by those around you, may lead you to avoid questioning yourself. And I wouldn't make too much of terms like "evil" or "brainwashing". That is simply rhetoric. Edit: Oh, and don't forget, many people are simply the south end of a northbound horse.

Why can you be superstitious but not a little bit stitious?

It sounds like you are saying 30mph is too fast for AI cars based on a report of one accident. Is that correct?

And yet my iPhone is capable of identifying the difference between my face and my brother's face. And he doesn't look anything like a dog. My phone even knows if my eyes are open or not. Do you have any evidence that technology is incapable of discerning between a dog and a child?

I recently learned about Muscovy ducks. We were trying to figure out what to do about the flies that gather around our chicken coop and were told about the Muscovy's, which are excellent at catching and eating flies!

I don't know what kind of vinegar you are using but I've never had a severe burn from vinegar.

Vinegar

On the opposite end of the spectrum today I learned the term callipygous, which will allow me to comment on my wife's friend's figure without her knowing what in the hell I'm talking about. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/callipygous

Damn iNow that is really awesome! Many years from now your kids are going to be fighting over who gets to keep which of your projects. You are making things that will be in use in your family for years and years!

How many total photons does a star emit in its life and how many photons does a black hole absorb in a given amount of time? And finally, how long will it take a black hole to absorb the number of photons it emitted?

Thanks for the good wishes! And the best to all of you and your families.

I don't think Trump would be considered a movie star.

Are Left/Right attributes similar across countries? For example in the US the Right tends to believe individuals should for the most part be responsible for their own health care (or at least they feel that way to a greater extent than the Left). Is the situation similar in Canada, Australia and Western Democracies in Europe?

I will simplify. You have come to the wrong place. You, and we, will all be happier if you follow the culture while here or move on to someplace that better fits your needs.

If you don't know then perhaps you should not be making your claim.

Lawmakers of course do not define reality. In fact they pass laws that are in opposition to reason on a regular basis. I'm surprised a person of science would make that statement.