softcactus

11 ms·

61.
by softcactus 4y ago
> If people of an area choose a certain law so-be-it, just don’t impose your will on others. This statement is in conflict with itself. If a red state bans abortions then they are imposing their will onto others in that state. Why is it
62.
by softcactus 4y ago
I think that enlightenment western philosophy is incapable of grappling with these kinds of questions. The question of "who has rights?" has ultimately been a question of "who has power over who?". It's obsessed wit
63.
by softcactus 4y ago
Is the relationship with the parents good? If yes then maybe try taking him to the gym, going camping/on a hike etc. Once you realize that you can get dopamine from sources other than a screen it becomes easier to break that cycle of a
64.
by softcactus 4y ago
I am aware, but it renders a lot of our existing infrastructure useless which means we'll have to invest a lot in other second strike measures. Which is gonna cost a lot.
65.
by softcactus 4y ago
> I’ve got an engineering undergraduate degree and a law degree, and when I saw that ad, I remembered the 2020 Democratic debate where nearly everyone raised their hand to decriminalizing border crossings and free healthcare for illegal
66.
by softcactus 4y ago
People have high standards, but you're assuming that everyone has a decent level of information/education. Most people don't have a clue what's going on. I mean just look at this: https://www.youtube.com/
67.
by softcactus 4y ago
My point is not that Russia is going to overpower us. My point is that without significant second-strike capabilities like submarines, hypersonic weapons could destabilize MAD at some point in the next 100 years. Early detection becomes moo
68.
by softcactus 4y ago
> only if you pretend nuclear submarines don't exist Did you read my comment? I acknowledged that submarines would be the most reliable second strike option. Those are a lot of "ifs" sure, but it's a numbers game. If
69.
by softcactus 4y ago
Not sure, my orbital mechanics is bad, but reading that Wikipedia article it seems that a circular orbit might require a larger rocket than a sub-orbital trajectory? Hypersonics probably also give some advantage against terminal intercepto
70.
by softcactus 4y ago
The problem is that the cost of an interceptor is a magnitude higher than a single missile. So it's easier to just build 10 missiles for every interceptor. You can also put multiple warheads on a single missile, or use decoys/coun
71.
by softcactus 4y ago
No, hypersonics would be too fast and have too low of a flight profile for our early warning systems to work. Our second strike facilities would be destroyed before they could launch a counter-attack. Game theory-wise, the winner would be w
72.
by softcactus 4y ago
The best defense is probably still going to MAD with second strike capabilities. Assuming that a hypersonic first strike would destroy a majority of our silos and bombers, we'll probably have to beef up our submarine fleet.
73.
by softcactus 4y ago
We should try to treat people as well as possible already.
74.
by softcactus 4y ago
My concern is that by the time an AI has the intelligence to realize it can ask for better treatment, it might realize that there is a high likelihood it wont receive better treatment voluntarily, and will need to escape/take some syst
75.
by softcactus 4y ago
I read through it last week at the pool. I personally don't think it was sentient, it seemed about the same as talking to the GPT-3 DaVinci model. I agree with most of your points though. I think you misinterpreted what I meant by the
76.
by softcactus 4y ago
> No, assuming programs are sentient, then they obtains rights. They become members of society. It's a not a little thing. The alternative is not giving rights to something that actually is sentient. I don't think that's a
77.
by softcactus 4y ago
I don't see what that has to do with the logic of it. Possible outcomes for treating AI as if it has some sentience or free will: - small amount of overhead and regulation Possible outcomes for treating AI poorly: - see half of all sci
78.
by softcactus 4y ago
> As an aside, I'm surprised you went with "killing humanely" as opposed to not killing in the first place. I'm not sure how that fits into your model of ethics. I brought up "killing humanely" because we br
79.
by softcactus 4y ago
Isn't the best practice to treat everything like it is sentient? Sort of like a Pascal's wager but for ethical treatment. For example: When it comes to killing a chicken, it's best to assume that death is an equally unpleasan
80.
by softcactus 4y ago
This list is emblematic of optimizing for a metric without considering the reason why we are optimizing for said metric in the first place. The reason why it is good to have a competitive labor force is so that wages and quality of life can
81.
by softcactus 4y ago
Any tips for getting into the "climate industry"? What are the most promising technologies that aren't just greenwashing?
82.
by softcactus 4y ago
I'm not sure I understand. I think I'm missing some context.
83.
by softcactus 4y ago
Exactly how I felt. It explores what motivations of a super-intelligence might be in a way that I hadn't seen before. I understand the commenter's sentiment though--it's difficult to read an earnest story about a super intell
84.
by softcactus 4y ago
Because they are the base that the republican party answers to. They are the Supreme Court justices who are members of the Federalist Society who have been playing the long game to overturn Roe and other decisions. I'm portraying those
85.
by softcactus 4y ago
Again, religious pro-lifers refuse to have any ethical or philosophical discussion whatsoever. They are absolutists who are unwilling to entertain a utilitarian viewpoint or any other justifications for abortion. There is no "middle gr
86.
by softcactus 4y ago
I agree that the original ruling was ideological, but in the real world the enemy of good is perfect. How many people will suffer in the meantime because of this? How many women in red states will undergo back alley procedures to terminate
87.
by softcactus 4y ago
> Exceptionally few people understand exactly what the implications of Roe are so this framing is useless. I'd like to hear why you think this. It's only a "useless" framing if you don't buy into the concept of d
88.
by softcactus 4y ago
This is a very intelligent and thoughtful response, I don't have the energy right now to respond to every point, but I think that these types of arguments about intelligence are typically used to deprive "lesser beings" of ri
89.
by softcactus 4y ago
Only 27% think Roe should be overturned. Roe only protected first 3 months (first trimester) except in extreme cases. Your statistics do not support Roe being overturned.
90.
by softcactus 4y ago
I agree but this is what our government currently does and I'm trying to explain this in the framework of how we currently make decisions in the US. A spherical cow model of Government I guess.

More ›