In a shocking twist, there is nothing new under the sun.

It’s more about nutrition and genetics.

Calories and macros in childhood is very critical to how people grow.

Oh they're not at all remnants. They're extremely important if you are part of a group, and always relevant. The fact that they depend on our evolutionary traits does not make them less transcendental.

Consciousness being sacred is merely us placing consciousness high on our priority, but that makes sense because we want to interact well with other consciousnesses. Perhaps subjective, but it makes sense

Wouldn't have been the first time. Same thing happened with google earth

In a shocking twist, everyone using a browser takes the same data with the same permissions.

100%, a reflection and a tool.

The topic with population collapse isn’t about there will be less people due to dying of old age, it is that as more people reach the legal retirement age, there are less and less people that are working to pay for the healthcares and retirement pensions.

So the obvious/dumb solution is not making people live longer, but rather making the existing working population retire later. But politically this is unfair to millennials and gen z since they now have to work even harder to reach the same living standards as their parents.

TLDR, life extension is not a solution to population collapse, the real solution is something magical that can make millennials and gen z willing to pay more taxes for longer period of time.

I think that’s what I’m wondering. “Moral” and “right” are meaningless, right? Just remnants of our evolution? Or are they?

There are so many patterns that crystallize into existence. Is there some math to the universe that leads to the idea that all consciousness is sacred and needs to be protected and cared for? Or is it just leftover colored thinking from when we used to hang out in trees?

There is people here that don't like me and what I have to say. It runs counter to their worldview "schema" and I can dig that. I've been in this rough and tumble for darn near a full ten years now. I got a pretty thick skin. Anyways I re-wrote my most recent reply to you. I apologize for any uncharitable remarks--I'm only human too. But tell me your reaction to this new comment replying to your belief that these AIs are going to imminently hit a "limit". Because, no, patently they are not.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/1224q6y/you_can_have_the_blue_pill_or_the_red_pill_and/jdzarvv/

Nuclear power. So. Much. Nuclear.

And, FWIW, I applaud them for it.

What's the good reason for France?

Many EU-countries will reach this goal "organically" i.e. by pure market-mechanisms before that date anyway. One charger every 60km along the main roads isn't a huge number of chargers, and many of these already exist, or are being built, to meet demand, even in the absence of any mandate.

The mandate will likely result in a few extra stations needing to be built during the few roads that are part of ten-t -- but have low enough demand that it's not otherwise directly profitable to build one. That's nice for people with EVs since it'll mean that there'll be frequent chargers along ALL of EUs main roads, rather than just most of EUs main roads.

What do you mean? Like it's "soulless" or something? How would you put "butter" on that. I mean I was just replying to the previous comment. Anyway, some people like my writing style and some people don't. I been here ten years. As in day, after day, after day, after day. I mean like continuously. Like I don't have a life. If you don't believe me, check out my profile. Apart from a little bit of "Catholic", rslashfuturology is all I do. And I've seen it all. So if you don't like what I write, I apologize that I disappoint you, but I just kinda write it out as it comes to my mind and at a pretty quick pace to boot.

Why "thousands"? One charging station per 60km, and only along the main roads that are part of the ten-t network would amount to a few hundred tops for most countries, and in fact odds are many countries will organically have reached this goal before the deadline simply from market-demand and the additional stations that need to be built to fulfill the promise are close to zero.

In a shocking twist, an AI was built on data taken without permission.

lol, of course somebody has to push the usual "renewables are a conspiracy pushed by the soviets rusians" BS narrative, curtesy of the nuclear industry.

Yeah no, nuclear isn't a solution to anything. Nuclear is an obstacle that isn't needed and a massive waste of money and resources.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-energy-nuclearpower-idUSKBN1W909J

https://phys.org/news/2011-05-nuclear-power-world-energy.html

https://spectator.clingendael.org/en/publication/nuclear-energy-too-costly-and-too-late

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_electricity

https://www.lazard.com/media/sptlfats/lazards-levelized-cost-of-energy-version-150-vf.pdf

Nuclear wouldn't even be able to provide global baseload capacity, while renewables can easily be scaled to provide for total global capacity. They are basically the only other source that could.

And it's so "safe" that the sector basically wouldn't exist without special legal constructs [see Price-Anderson in the US for exmaple) that absolve the industry from any responsibility regarding these "non-existent" risks:

>The Price-Anderson Act, which limits utility liability in the event of nuclear accidents, is totally out of sync with US energy goals because it places a heavy thumb on the scale of resource acquisition, favoring the wrong type of assets (high risk, high cost) in the current economic environment. In an uncertain environment, financial risk analysis teaches that the investor should preserve options and value flexibility by keeping decisions small and preferring investments with low, more predictable risks and short lead times. With their high risks, large sunk costs, long lead times, and extremely long asset lives, nuclear reactors are the worst type of assets to acquire at present.

https://thebulletin.org/2020/02/the-us-government-insurance-scheme-for-nuclear-power-plant-accidents-no-longer-makes-sense/

https://thebulletin.org/2011/10/nuclear-liability-the-market-based-post-fukushima-case-for-ending-price-anderson/

Oh yeah, "of course" renewables don't work. I guess that's way all the experts point out why going 100% renewable is totally possible?

>Recent studies show that a global transition to 100% renewable energy across all sectors – power, heat, transport and desalination well before 2050 is feasible. According to a review of the 181 peer-reviewed papers on 100% renewable energy that were published until 2018, "[t]he great majority of all publications highlights the technical feasibility and economic viability of 100% RE systems." A review of 97 papers published since 2004 and focusing on islands concluded that across the studies 100% renewable energy was found to be "technically feasible and economically viable." A 2022 review found that the main conclusion of most of the literature in the field is that 100% renewables is feasible worldwide at low cost.

>Existing technologies, including storage, are capable of generating a secure energy supply at every hour throughout the year. The sustainable energy system is more efficient and cost effective than the existing system. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated in their 2011 report that there is little that limits integrating renewable technologies for satisfying the total global energy demand.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100%25_renewable_energy

😂

Submission statement

The tech ethics organization Center for AI and Digital Policy (CAIDP) has asked the Federal Trade Commission to investigate OpenAI for violating consumer protection regulations. CAIDP alleges that OpenAI's AI text generation tools are "biased, deceptive, and dangerous to public safety."

CAIDP's complaint raises concerns about the potential threat of OpenAI's GPT-4 generated text model, which was announced in mid-March. It warns of the potential for GPT-4 to generate malware and highly personalized propaganda, and the risk that biased training data could lead to ingrained stereotypes or unfair racial and gender preferences in employment.

The complaint also cites significant privacy failures in the OpenAI product interface, such as a recent bug that exposed OpenAI ChatGPT records and potentially ChatGPT and subscribers' payment details.

CAIDP seeks to hold OpenAI liable for violating Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair and deceptive trade practices. The complaint alleges that OpenAI knowingly released GPT-4 to the public for commercial use despite the risks, including potential bias and harmful behavior.

CAIDP is a European Union AI Policy Advisor, the organization that supports the Council of the European Union in establishing an AI legal framework, U.S. Congressional AI Policy Statement, Member of the U.S. AI National Strategy Advisory Committee, OECD and G20 Policy advisors.

How many power stations are you approving and building in 3 years. FFS please learn how something, anything works.

biometrics are so silly, the QR code reader on the bus can't even identify the bus pass displayed on my phone a quarter of the time, brittle bullshit gee wizardry

So we all should be non-conformists. like everyone else.

Assuming it acquires the traits necessary for having an ethical system (let me speculate... a sense of self and the environment, perceived needs, understanding of how to cover those needs and some game theory to interact successfully with others, among others?), it will interact with the current system somehow, tackling the same obstacles.

Similar questions often elicit similar answers, so I imagine its ethical system might be different but not too far from some of ours. At the very least, it'll have to decide between the current "me versus you" and "us helping each other" mindsets.

no, its the social peer pressure from the system that is cracking people up. Telling you the world is this when you are born then to find out its the opposite when you get older./

I think its disgusting but to each its own. I rather have them make a whole new product rather then to replace real meat...... but bill gates have spend a lot of money on this and its promotion so we wont get rid of this any time soon.

nope not even close

We hit ~60% solar and windpower in Denmark in 2022 because Kriegers Flak came online. I think we are above 75% with biomass and garbage CHP.

It's always a rude awakening when you look at gross energy consumption though. Renewable share drops a lot when we include transportation, heating etc.