dimreepr

I think so.

OK,but please explain why I'm mistaken?

Probably a stupid question, but doesn't time effectively stop from the POV of the observer at the event horizon?

If he's dead,, why are you wasting our time, trying to defend a man, whom you can't possibly know to be innocent?

Your describing a functioning democracy, all be it a terrifyingly binary knife edge ATM, but what it's not, is a hidden authority; bc of those pesky journo's.

We can't, imagine a two dimensional character living in the clock, it can only say cuckoo when the big hand changes to being fully erect. 😉

Indeed, but maintaining a positive association post conviction is very suspicious, if only for the fact that they feel entitled enough to not care if it's suspicious.or morally wrong.

He's taking a very British approach to foreign policy, talk loudly and slowly and if they still refuse to understand, invade their country and shoot them for being stupid. "The king is dead, long live the king"... Who do you think the king maker has their eye on?

Nish Kumar, on BBC sounds, is far more entertaining... What makes you think that this is an argument?

It also has the benefit of creating the conditions, in which he can excuse the use of actual troop's and, perhaps, martial law; I think his only chance of his third term. @KJW he still has to dance for the people, politically, and the US is still a democracy, however tenuous it's grip; I still have faith in the US massive... 🤙

Indeed, it depends, what algorithm and how does it relate to human thinking?

If memory serves, a North Korean dollar bill was a perfect copy, and like money it's dependant on trust. I'm not a subscriber to the view that evil is only subjective. One can axiomatically assert the "golden rule" and derive the notions of good and evil from that. It depends on how deep you want to dig, it reminds me a of a Richard Feynman lecture, in which he tries to explain magnetism as a force. "One death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic" - someone famous... ATM the future of AI is scarey enough to prompt societal push back, as in Australia banning children from social media. The political pundulum will always swing towards the extreme; philosophically, a benign dictator is way to go, realistically a computer is our best chance of achieving that goal.

It might be a hologram, depending on one's perspective... 😉

When the inputs that benefits certain people, as in the current problem's with social media, is a glimpse that can be frightening; but the evolution of an AI, with a reasonable facsimile of the 3/4 law's of robotics, is potentially the closest approach to the sunlight uplands. "The fundamental problem with dealing with computers is that one can't negotiate with them." I see that as the fundamental reason a computer is beneficial to society; the judiciary shouldn't be negotiable... That may be true, but they still decide who gets to vote...

There are thing's that are true in science, the axioms; everything else is a temporary truth, or target for every scientist to shoot at.