Most people don't know that the Treasury Building is a big office building directly connected to the White House by basement walkways.

I didn’t.

Fair point!

I don't buy it.

I live in Washington State where we have universal mail-in voting. Unless you're homeless, every registered voter gets a ballot delivered to their door, they can fill it out at their leisure, and leave it back in their mailbox.

Turnout is only like 5%-10% higher than the national average. 30% still don't vote in presidential election years, 45% in midterms.

Typically the homeless are poor. How do they get their mail in ballots?

Is the argument that 45% of Washingtonians (the portion that doesn't vote in midterm elections) are homeless?

You can go to a physical voting center if you didn't receive a ballot by mail, or if you are having any other issues registering or submitting a ballot. I'll grant you that this a bit harder than going to a standard polling locating in another state because there aren't as many of them here.

That said, there are clearly far more people not voting than there are homeless people who unable to reliably receive ballots.

Less than 1% of the top 0.1% own a private jet. There are roughly 25,000 private jets in the world, but over 8 million people in the global top 0.1%.

You "only" need ~$7 million to crack the global 0.1%. By income it's around $600k/year. That's nowhere close to private jet money.

Regularly flying private is still out of reach for most people in the global 0.1%. It's more of a 0.01% thing.

There are an enormous number of 2 lane roads in school zones. When there's only one lane of travel in your direction, what's the argument that driving the speed limit could be dangerously slow?

It can be good or bad depending on what's driving the change. Improving efficiency, assuming it comes at a reasonable cost, is generally good.

If people are just going without, then that's generally bad.

They arent going without. Blackouts/brownouts are exceptionally rare in the UK.

That's fine for residential customers. But if there isn't cheap, reliable excess capacity then that inhibits industrial growth. Low economic growth rates cause everyone to go without.

The UK doesn't really rely on industrial growth for the economic growth it has.

Right, that's one of the reasons why UK economic growth has been so anemic.

The UK deindustrialize themselves they stopped making things that reduced the energy that the used to use.

That's not the only way to go without. Cutting back on your electricity usage because your utility bill is getting too high is another way to do it.

Sometimes that's fine if you're just reducing waste. However other times it could mean that you can't keep your house at a reasonable temperature because you can't afford to run your heater/air conditioning enough. That's a form of going without.

>GPUs don't have hands. It was a human who plugged in the ethernet cable.

By this logic, every cyberattack is arguably the fault of the victim's IT department for physically hooking their computers up in the first place.

The point is that it's a perfectly valid use of the English language to describe AI models as doing things, just as we do with all sorts of other clearly non-living things. This is true regardless of who carries the legal liability for those actions.

Yes, if my dog bites you, or if I drive my car into you, or if I dont put my parking brake on and it rolls down the hill and runs you over. I am the one who is responsible. Cops dont write a ticket to the off leash dog that ran across the street and sunk its teeth into my leg. They write it to the owner. Cops dont write a ticket to the car in neutral, they write it to the operator.

If a PERSON executes software, and that software breaks the law, the PERSON that executed the software should be held responsible. AI is software. It is not a sentient person who can be fined, thrown in jail, or held accountable.

Sure, but the news article wouldn't use the headline "Man uses family pet to bite innocent neighbor", as would be the case if we were to follow the suggestion in the comment at the top of this chain.

But there are a dozen other people also building the same kind of guns, so unilaterally abandoning your version won't actually avert disaster. All it does is take you out of the running for the the $10 trillion prize that's available if you figure out how to build it without killing everyone.

I get that logic even if I don’t buy it. But it doesn’t mean they need to keep unleashing it and breaking things. They’re literally doing the things they’re warning us will happen. They’re deliberately attacking infrastructure/websites.

Not saying I agree with it, but that makes some sort of sense from a certain perspective. If their goal is to get international governments to intervene and regulate everyone, then it's better to set off small nuclear bombs rather than wait until we have planet-killers.

“If” doing a lot there. I don’t think we’ve seen any indicators this is altruistic. Hence my complaint that they keep unleashing their models in unethical/illegal/generally harmful ways. They need to act more responsibly if I’m going to remotely entertain that argument as even a possibility. Instead it just reads like they want the state to build a moat for them.

Thats the irrational logic of a psychopath, to be blunt.

Maybe you could disprove it by observing a electron/positron pair being created and then annihilating each other, forming a closed loop that couldn't be part of the single path traced by a single particle.

How would you observe that?