Well I for one am quite shocked that the Archbishop of Canterbury is still investing in the slave trade in this day and age! /s

I didn’t realize this sloth was in fact our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Why did you feel the need to slander an innocent woman?

A dad has described the “unbelievable” moment he opened his eyes after suffering a cardiac arrest - and being placed in an induced coma - to see his newborn daughter’s face for the first time.

When 27-year-old Sam King’s heart stopped at home in Hedge End, near Southampton, he went two hours without a sustained heartbeat.

His survival is thanks to the actions of his wife, Emma, who was then 39 weeks pregnant, and a team of NHS staff, who continued treating Sam.

Since then, Sam has experienced a remarkable recovery, and said he first began to show signs he might pull through when he was shown his daughter, Sophie, for the first time, who was born four days after he almost died.

I think a good way to handle these might be to get everyone on the plane to start chanting “troll” in unison at her. By doing so:

• You directly call out the disruptive and bad-faith behavior, rather than attacking them based on their message.
• You make it so they have no useful footage for their socials. Post a video of one person confronting you? Easy to claim victimhood based on religion. Post a video of a whole plane calling you a troll? You look like the bad guy.
• You make it a group effort that people can participate in with little risk or effort. It takes much less courage to join a chant of, “troll! troll! troll!” than it does to personally and individually call them out. Plus, chants are just fun.
• You completely drown them out. Let her bitch all she wants. No one will hear her over a hundred people shouting “troll” in unison.

I would just shout loudly implying they’re a pedophile. Anyone pushing Jesus this hard is trying to cover up something extremely dark about themselves.

Have a good day.

You are cringe. With your bizarre desire to drag this into a tired exercise in generational warfare. Sorry, I don’t buy that bullshit.

Because it’s cringe as fuck.

Maybe he earned a lot more money than we thought in that brief period at the start where he tried to use his powers in the underground fighting circuit.

But I wanna build the torment nexus!

My pleasure. You to!

You have to be very careful with such articles. They’re vulnerable to the same AI hype cycles as anything else. And those systems rarely work as well as the people selling them claim they do. Those articles you’re reading are written from the press releases of for-profit companies. The technology is also being used for mass medical fraud.

Come on, that’s a warped bad-faith take and you know it. Making child porn with a film camera is illegal. Every camera is capable of making child porn. But we don’t outlaw cameras, or adult pornography, simply because the same tools allow the creation of child porn.

You are talking crap.

By your logic, we should outlaw cameras. Every camera is capable of making child pornography.

If you’re not willing to fight for your constitutional rights, then you don’t deserve to have them, and you will lose them.

Whether you think it’s right or not, being able to create nudified images of yourself is a perfectly valid and constitutionally protected action, just like making pornography generally. And any attempt to ban these apps would also restrict numerous other constitutionally protected activities and involve severe violations of privacy.

If you want to make an actual reply that gets to the core of my argument, rather than just going, “bruh, you think you should be able to rob a bank, no I refuse to actually explain anything, if you don’t get my unstated point, you’re a moron,” then go ahead.

Constitutional rights are important. You cannot choose to abandon them just because you find one application of them distasteful.

We can ban AI child porn by just treating it like any other child porn. We don’t try to regulate child porn by outlawing cameras. Go after the actual crime you want to prevent, not the tools that have many legitimate uses.

It’s a bit of a pet peeve of mine when people are too lazy to even do a simple search for a definition. It’s fine to ask for detailed info. But it’s rude to ask a stranger to provide something you could instantly find on a search engine. I’m happy to provide detailed explanation, but I want to at least see the other person is willing to put in an iota of effort first. If they don’t care, why should I?

I want to see more people claiming formal religious exemptions to being forced to use AI in the workplace. A good case can at least be made for chat bots.

Plenty of religions and cultures have held that words are sacred. The universe was spoken into being. Life was breathed into Man. Etc. That’s the tradition I would appeal to.

If I’m forced to use a chat bot at my work, I’m being forced to have a machine put words in my mouth. Instead of my words representing my own voice, my own, my own soul, a soulless machine speaks for me instead.

I think it’s perfectly reasonable to refuse to use AI on religious grounds.

Exactly. If a future superintelligence wants to create a copy of me to torture, well I suppose it can do that. But that entity it creates will not be me, but a lossy copy of me. I will be long dead and in the ground.

If a future superintelligence wants to create innocent sentient beings just to torture them, well that’s on the AI. It can be responsible for its own sins. But it has nothing to do with me.

One example where it may be truly revolutionary is astrophysics research. I saw a lecture by an astronomer talking about it. Astrophysics works well with the limitations of AI. A lot of their work is building simplified models to study large complex astrophysical systems. Imagine someone modeling the formation of planets in a circumstellar disk.

The key is that these are very contained problems. You’re just trying to simulate a little toy solar system. The code can all be completely self-contained and doesn’t need to deeply integrate with tons of other existing software and infrastructure.

The problem is those use cases justify approximately 1% of the money being invested in it. There’s no money in fighting wildfires. Drug discovery is profitable, but you’ll only need to use such a drug discovery bot once. You can use it to determine which molecules are worthy of testing, but the expensive testing still needs to be done manually.