In the US, the police presupposing a threat is a good way to get someone killed. Their confirmation bias can be deadly.
 
Also do not forget, arrest can be expensive, sometimes cripplingly so, even if there are no charges you can still end up with 'court fees' which can quickly rack up interest.

Eh, I am old enough to remember after various mass shootings people turning in kids for writing dark poetry and violent artwork. With such rare events and panic kicking in, people look for possible threats and false positives skyrocket... which on the surface might sound like a fair price to pay for safety, but the people who get swept up in these moral panics don't feel that way.
 
I can also recall schools watching people's emails and IMs looking for 'threats', and not exactly thrilled that AI companies are taking up that pro-authority charge.

Great way to position your company as a 'friend of law enforcement' though. Cause problems, encourage people, then turn them in.

Thinking back though.. the python zealots loved talking about python and tried to get people to have fun with it, but they were also big on creating thier own tools and ecosystems. The Rust zealots on the othr seems really bent on pushing rust into existing high profile projects.
 
Put another way, the python people wanted to use python for everything, the rust people want everything to be using rust.

ok

Oh you mean the blog

OK yeah so you are a crank. Ai psychosis is a bitch.

Not sure what you are trying to say here. Bot maybe?

Just to be clear, what exactly is "It"?

I really do feel sorry for you guys. It must be so frustrating to be so smart yet so stupid.

That's a blog dude. No one is taking seriously a blog run by a bunch of Ai insiders with Ai psychosis.

This is how it always is with you cranks. No amount of facts or logic based arguments are ever enough. They're always just "terrible examples".

He means that they are software programs and have no capacity for emotions regardless of what some self-interested blog post tries to tell you.

Well, I have no idea what the posters actual intention was, but there is a difference between an idea being the only thing that will work, and the idea being a good one. There are plenty of problems around where the solution is bad enough that it brings into question if you are even solving the right issue.
 
I view the birth rate issue this way.. I suspect the person is not that far off, and while you can mitigate the falling birthrates through various incentives and supports, the big driver really is that as women gain equality and their own lives, they make the same decision men likely would in their position and now want to have children.
 
But I think the solution is really going to have to involve coming up with a political and economic system that does not depend on constant growth.

This is such a ridiculous argument. Owning and flying a helicopter is no where near the same thing as owning and driving a car. It's not even worth it to entertain such a ridiculous comparison.