Creating public debate

Ok, then, let's give them what they want.

I'll start. I am an admittedly selfish American. Fuck everyone else. Fuck everyone who isn't me. From that premise, what are the advantages of renaming the gulf? Sure, it's causing some seemingly-unnecessary expense, but that's balanced by ..

...

..uh, sorry, I'm drawing a blank. How can the gulf rename give me an advantage? What is the upside to doing this? If I come out ahead at someone else's expense, that's great. I want to do that. I hope someone else loses and their life gets worse, as long as my life gets better, even if just a tiny bit. But how does my life get better from this? I'm fine if a thousand children are raped and murdered as collateral damage, as long as I get a penny. So where the fuck is my penny?!

Surely, someone has an answer to this.

I'm pro-automation for all jobs, and IRS workers are no exception. If you can automate these jobs, that's great. But whoever is in charge of this is either unintelligent or inexperienced.

In the past when a customer and I automated a job, we did things in a special order that I think would surprise the hell out of Bessent. My big trade secret (should I be leaking this?!) is this:

First, you think about how to do the job. Then you think about what the code should do. Then you write the code, test it, and then have a little trial in production, and see how it goes. Eventually you gain confidence and then finally .. how about that, my customer just removed those positions.

Notice how the word "think" appeared a lot at the beginning of the above schedule, and getting rid of the humans who made sure the job was getting done, came at the very end? My proprietary ordering of these operations is how I got a big advantage. (Yeah, I probably shouldn't be leaking this.)

It turns out that aiming after you fire instead of before, results in a much lower percentage of your shots hitting the target. I wonder if Bissent is traveling backwards in time. That would explain how they got rid of the workers first and now they're nebulously speculating on how they might, some day about a decade from now, create automation to replace the workers they got rid of way back in 2025.

I can imagine.

steal millions of dollars of financial aid

Why are you giving them any money at all, before you even know who they are?

I don't know. In what city should human taxi drivers stop driving because of snow?

If the humans say yes and then kill some of their passengers, and Waymo says no and doesn't kill anyone, then I think Waymo wins some bragging rights. Or at least their liability lawyers would look pretty smug.

Just Say No is an underused strategy, and I'm really just trying to say that as a service, Waymo can use it when they think it's the right one for the moment, whereas someone like Tesla would have a much harder time. Humans drivers have access to that strategy too, but we're usually too stupid to remember, or too stupid to be willing to "puss out." I know, because I am one of those stupid humans, though I haven't killed anyone yet.

Under those conditions, the people are already in a bad situation, whether Waymo exists or not.

Why would anyone care whether the driver who says "No" is a robot or a human? No means it matters even less than if they had said yes.

One of the things that makes automated driving as a service (as opposed to a product) such a great idea, is that if the current weather makes the job too hard, then it can simply decide to not take the job. "Stupid storm. I'm not driving in this. [click click] Shit, Waymo doesn't want to drive in this either."

Same goes for other oddball situations that you might run into in places like Rome: just don't serve Rome, if you really think the place itself is too hard (e.g. narrow streets).

They aren't selling a general-purpose driving computer (though obviously they'd like to gradually/eventually create one). They're just offering "I can do this job."

I can understand people bitching about PGP, and I don't even object to people calling it "terrible" and "clunky." But I'm surprised that you'd say it has been "surpassed." Surpassed by what? I've never heard of any serious attempts to replace it, except .. maybe .. oh no, you don't mean X.509, do you?

I mean Jesus fucking Christ the state of Texas just sued toothpaste manufacturers over fluoride.

What are people supposed to do? Just sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all our precious bodily fluids?!

It also helps that Bharat/India is Hindu. Hinduism is a naturally pluralistic and democratic https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpluralism.org%2F (one step above tolerance), Dharmic, academically rich culture promoting Yoga, learning, and peace/wellness of mind, body and spirit that has suffered centuries of abuse by barbaric British/colonial and Islamic invaders.

The oldest Hindu/Vedic scripture (Rg Veda, 5000 years old) states that God is the innermost consciousness within all, and people call Him or Her by different names. All oyher religious conflicts wete inflicted by later, Abrahamic religiins, Christinaity +Islam primarily.

  https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.dharmapedia.net%2Fwik...

Vivek_but_not_Ramaswamy.

_/\_ \\// as MrSpock might say

My Solution to SchrÃdingerâ(TM)s Cat Paradox
1. Clarify the Setup
A cat is placed in a box with a device triggered by a quantum event (radioactive decay).

If the event occurs, the cat dies; if not, the cat lives.

Quantum mechanics says the atom is both decayed and not decayed until observed.

Does this mean the cat is both alive and dead?

2. Key Insight: The Cat Is Not a Quantum Object
The paradox arises from applying quantum rules (superposition) to a macroscopic object (the cat).

In reality, quantum superpositions are extremely fragile and donâ(TM)t last in large, warm, complex systems like cats.

3. Decoherence: The Real-World Mechanism
As soon as the quantum event interacts with the detector (Geiger counter), the system becomes entangled with the environment (air molecules, photons, etc.).

This process, called decoherence, destroys the superposition almost instantly for anything as large as a cat.

The cat is either alive or dead long before you open the box-the âoesuperpositionâ is only a mathematical description of your knowledge, not of physical reality.

4. Observation Is Not Special
You, the observer, donâ(TM)t have magical powers. The measurement (the detectorâ(TM)s click) is what matters, not your eyes.

The catâ(TM)s fate is sealed by the time the quantum event is amplified to the macroscopic level.

5. Conclusion: No Real Paradox
The cat is never truly both alive and dead in the physical sense.

The paradox is a misunderstanding of how quantum mechanics applies to large systems.

In practice, the cat is always either alive or dead-just unknown to you until you look.

In short:
The SchrÃdingerâ(TM)s cat paradox is resolved by recognizing that quantum superpositions donâ(TM)t survive in big, complex systems. The cat is always either alive or dead, and the âoeparadoxâ is just a quirk of how we describe our knowledge, not of reality.

Low or not, it's the bar.

I just use my :CueCat to scan everyone's faces. Hold still.

This is Biden inflation caused by the Biden import taxes, no doubt due to Democrats' love of taxes. Good Comrade Trump had to clean that up by replacing the business-hostile Biden import taxes with business-friendly tariffs, and the tariffs are at a much higher rate, showing they're much more serious and important. Nobody has micromanaged an economy as well as Good Comrade Trump, and furthermore, Trump's Central Committee recently approved people purchasing two video game consoles, which is plenty. You don't need thirty of them like some running dog capitalists do.

It does not solve any of the underlying problems the kids are facing. .. we don't do anything about the kids not having any futures because they can't afford to go to college

That's an orthogonal issue. Suppose they did have a possible future: they'd still have the problem of classrooms being unviable because the kids are on their black mirrors instead of paying attention to class.

If you want to fix the economy or education funding or whatever, fine. Go for it! But while you're in the middle of that Herculean task, you're going to have teachers pleading "do something about my immediate problem right here and now. Mr Legislator, this will take just a few minutes of your time away from your bigger grand economic project that you're spending years trying to formulate."

Whatever good future you envision, is going to be more possible/probable if classrooms are able to function. And it's not like they're selling this ban-phones-in-class thing as being the solution to college funding, are they?

This is something dipshit neoliberal types do so they can Pat themselves on the back doing good without actually doing the hard work of doing real good.

Let them! If even a few kids start paying attention in class, the dipshit neolibs will have earned a back pat. Dude, it's just one back pat! That's all they're getting, not a contract for five years of daily blowjobs. They'll still have to earn that by solving your college funding problem. And in exchange for this one backpat, they'll address the experts' (i.e. teachers') concerns about how classrooms are getting fucked up by black mirrors.