I’ve heard both Melon Husk and Lil’ Jeffy Kisses repeat this sentiment. Where do they even get their figure? Something like 120 billion humans have existed, ever, and there has been only one Einstein and one Mozart. 1/120B * 1T = 8.5.

Factor in the widespread nutritional and medical resource shortages that would come along with one trillion humans, and I’m confident that number would drop to zero.

It seems to be that we’d be better off ensuring the future of humanity and focusing on science. Surely it would be quicker to experiment with genetics to grow an Einstein than it would be to implement a trillion-human breeding lottery hoping to find one.

I believe he’s said that he doesn’t listen to music, which makes it even funnier to me. A real, “hello fellow humans” moment from Robo Chromedome.

Oh, so you’ve heard of this thing called “science” before?

We can get some idea of what their brains looked like based upon imprints left on the inside of the skull. We can get an idea of relative intelligence based on artifacts, like tools and art. If you know that cranial volume dropped, but you can see imprints indicating more folds, and you can see cave art indicating more sophisticated culture, and more advanced tools, then you know with reasonable certainly that you’re looking at a more intelligent creature despite the smaller brain.

Allow me to read the article for you:

As smaller and better organised brains were able to perform more complex computations, metabolically expensive larger brains simply became unnecessary

Tattersall believes that the catalyst that caused this change in thinking style was the spontaneous invention of language. This led to the neural pathways of the brain being reorganised in a more metabolically efficient way, allowing humans to get more “bang for their buck”.

In other words, as smaller and better organised brains were able to perform more complex computations, metabolically expensive larger brains simply became unnecessary.

How does one qualify for a job in that particular field? It sounds like an interesting intersection of tangible creation, service, and medical knowledge.

I’ve read that women’s skin is elastic along two axes while men’s skin is elastic along only one axis. Is true, or variable across a spectrum, or simply false?

I think you misunderstood the parent comment. Admittedly, it was poorly worded.

Trump is going to run our armament and petroleum supply so low that Russia and China can Red Dawn us… This time, we won’t have Patrick Swayze to save us.

From what I’ve seen, it’s CRT televisions that are sought after by vintage gamers, not out-of-date computer monitors. There were so many truly awful CRT computer monitors out there before LCDs came around. I’m aware that there were plenty of cheap, low-quality LCDs, too, I just want to drive home the point about all the awful, .41 dot-pitch, flickering SVGA monitors with inconsistent, blotchy color that roamed the earth in the before times (i.e. the 90s).

Things like the 40 year old computer monitors have a negative value, unless they’re something special like a 21" Trinitron or an IBM T220/221.

Unless the furniture and furnishings are of a sought-after style (e.g. Art Deco), they’re basically worthless.

I sold most of my belongings back in 2009. Furniture and beds had basically zero value. A solid wood table retained decent value. Electronics were worthless unless they were vintage collectable (e.g. Rotel amplifier). eBay was the best place to sell things because people are committed. Craigslist and Facebook Marketplace are a huge time-suck because you get so many flakes, low-ballers, and tire-kickers.

The problem is that you’re not arguing anything.

No, the problem is that you presented no argument. You just presented a false equivalence.

Your first comment is an ad hominem at best

I quite literally addressed what you wrote, and the complete lack of substance. It wasn’t any kind of personal attack. You’re abusing logical fallacies in order to sidestep the fact that you never presented any kind of argument.

Your actual argument boils down to, “AI isn’t complex enough yet, therefore it will never be or is some long time away”. Okay, that’s really not much of an argument. Progress marches on.

That’s better, but you’re still just defining things such that you have to be correct.

Humans spend 90% of their time just predicting the next token. All we need is to mix in a little bit more reasoning and bam, AGI!

See how annoying and hollow that rhetorical technique is?

The fact is that we have no idea whatsoever. We might reach AGI next week. We might never reach AGI. The Chinese government might be sitting on AGI right now. We have no idea, and this is completely new territory that has caused us to question our very understanding of intelligence.

Wow, what a solid argument you’ve made. It definitely doesn’t reek of someone trying to hype themselves up in the face of an unknown threat.

TIL there were usable tow trucks in GTA:SA.

Am I correct in my understanding that Ukraine is targeting Wildberries because they were distributing parts used to manufacturer drones for warfare? And that these are all warehouses, not (directly) related to manufacturing?