When you want the world to be better you can say bad things about others or you can try harder within said world. The first way won't work. Nobody is an "idiot", and most people choose option 1. You can make a Google and not necessarily have made the world any better, so it is considerateness which leads the way, which is antithetical with dismissing anyone. Half the countries in the world could all share one flag that just says: "Other people are stupid", you don't need borders any more. Peace.

What if Capitalism is a crime?

"They are not recording any footage, they are not streaming any footage and no one is actually watching it," he said. This can be true even if the data goes straight to the CCTV footage and brings up that moment at that location to save a picture tagged with when, where, and what the AI said had happened. So... is it intentionally couched or do they mean this isn't ever going to be used to personally identify people, ever ever ever, they promise, no matter what, these points of indormation are considered inviolably never to touch any other data from elsewhere? What are the terms of that and my ligeal rithes, oh my leaders? :(

"Nationally-controlled" doesn't apply to nations, a nation's economy, a nation's law enforcement - nor is there a text or person or set of persons to whom to attribute "control" over the course which a body of laws takes. There is no such thing as a border on earth. There are low-paid men paid to stand with weapons near barbed-wire around all the people. They leave their representatives at once... who thrived on being "spoken about" as though they were "powerful" (yet, without power to enact), which is their only form of control: lies and platform. We're not waiting for the goverment of any country to suddenly acknowledge the ones who sleep on the streets, we're waiting for the people to leave their governments so that none must sleep on the streets. The stupider the developments of statism, the quicker we can go home. Fucking with the internet is a good way to get a regime fired, but I don't expect there's enough time left for that to develop. Surely nationalism has made its point by now? The populates will go: "Ohhh, *we* were in charge of ourselves all along", we blamed politicians for what they could not achieve which we ourselves did not attempt". And the attempt will be the renunciation. One more: if your accepted remote rulers aren't bearing responsibility for your envrionment, if you can see that, the responsibility is on you. Who else? Are you not more powerful than Donald Trump? I think so.

Today I don't want an ad-blocker so much as I want a content-finder. Find me the paragraphs and stop fucking with the css every time I change websites. I literally just want the thing that I was looking for. I'm fine writing/downloading maps for individual sites which are hard to interpret when I need those, and clicking on image placeholders when I need those. I don't want to see menubars, I want an option to reveal the menubar. Then I want to choose the CSS values I find best for reading.

What is better for creating new diseases than moving animals all over the world, putting them close together, getting them to share water, opening up their bodies and letting their bloods all be in the same place? 'Bird Flu', 'Swine Flu', 'Foot and Mouth', 'Mad Cow Disease' sound a lot like 'meat industry byproducts'. The 1918 flu was borne of similar circumstances albeit with humans. I'll vote for other people's license to support the meat industry but I can't say I find it hygienic at any stretch. (Now let the derogatory remarks about China commence /s)

I had a chat to Him about this. Our (Christian) Church of England was created in order for its founder to get a divorce... Christ said: "I do not forgive divorce." Nowadays its head does not "recognise" Bethlehem, Nazareth, or Magdalene. God is not in need of anything and knows everything is perfect. He is clearly not in the House of Commons, but stays close by those who pray to Him. How many a civilisation rebelled and then came to a cataclysm; we hear not whisper nor trace of them. The end is in sight.

Where/when do women tell bigger lies than men? Is there a reason to believe so?

Seems to me that an AI would be pretty good at going through the sequences of (sequenced) viruses and finding what they have in common which they don't have in common with benign stuff. That might give a way to find (some) creepies in dense samples without needing to know about them first... We could then look for the creepy subsequences.

I'm just here to call out "Shut up Commie" and then to carry on my day. One day, we can have a respectful society on earth. It's a thing not yet created, designed, or established, but a thing to be born from the broken shards of the last millennium. It'll involve respect and decency, perhaps it'll have something to do with how we interact. Here's to the future. We are all learning.

I loved this comment, thanks for clear-headedness. I agree too that the response from roughly all the humans combined has been amazing... It's the first time all our species has responded to the same thing all at once. Waaay bigger than the world wars, way bigger than 9/11; and we're all on the same side. My reading is that as soon as the people knew there was something to be careful about, we acted carefully as individuals and did the sensible things like distancing, masks, and extra handwashing (in almost every single case without any enforcement necessary). I saw London completely shut down, where populates have acted more or less optimally (with no need for coercion). As soon as the governments knew there was something to be careful about... They didn't respond nearly as quickly as the people. But we were trusting our governments to tell us something was up (then we changed our behaviour autonomously, trusting the warnings eventually given out as we do trust). The ever-so-elect infrastructures are where the lag is and was... Except in the case of China, I guess, where the two months from nothing is pretty swift to figure out there's a brand new virus set to affect the whole world. There are no enemies here, but there are issues and no adults in charge to solve them. Here's hope for the future and the wellbeing of everyone, no exceptions.

I don't think it's facetious to insist that the utility of finding meth labs would be evidenced by the reduction of harms relating to meth. You weren't saying that's the only use or the best use of what is obviously a very rich source of realtime geographic data relating to human biology. But so far prohibition hasn't furthered a useful goal, and I feel so enraged by that and the harms I see of prohibition in my area I was moved to comment. Peace.

Uh, there's a weird mechanism in our culture (perhaps a self-defence mechanism of culture) where if one person says: "Hey, I think this thing we don't do yet would make the world a better place." Someone nearby will jump in quicker than were someone on fire, to say: "Not possible", or the time-honoured "Oh yeah, 'they' do that/thought of that already." It's like reverse confirmation bias. We can know our systems are not perfect, we can sing about problems all day long, but if someone mentions solutions or tries to turn the topic to solutions - consistently, I find the response is defensiveness and to try shut it down. Is it people don't want to admire someone right next to them had a worthy idea that they didn't think about, that good ideas are equated with material rewards postfact so that a niche good idea in the wild lacks the kudos of whatever is already established (and open to improvement), or that we are taught without pause that we are powerless to change the world except by established methods ((oxymoron)) and those channels of possibility and approvement? To hope in these days is so often seen as madness, whilst we really do have every reason to hope and try to solve stuff. I think it shows what asking "a biologist" instead of "a human" gets you, if it's not too far to suggest our combined expertise remain still amply fallible and limited. [\rant]. Keep speculating!!

Here in the UK we have crime and violence but we really don't have situations where an AR-15 is going to get you out of trouble. (I acknowledge that's a luxury and the USA has no "get rid of all the guns" button.) Robbers here tend to make sure you're not in as the first thing about robbing. For 80 year olds being vulnerable I don't think our solution is arm them with automatic weapons... if we're making policy about it. ******* In the UK, police don't normally carry guns at all, but if people had them they'd need them. And that's what guns do... they raise the baseline of violence. ****** We've had a school shooting here, in Dunblaine, from a "gun enthusiast", and that was enough. We've had two executions without trial (disclosed) and never one without riots. ****** For the US, I think you deserve some areas where there are no guns at all, for people who want that, and then places where you can have guns all day long. Nobody in gun-free areas regrets there aren't more guns around, ever. We just have lives which aren't as often interrupted by guns. Being armed against the government doesn't work unless you have a strategy how to check your government, but it's clear why you'd want such a strategy.

Sure, but if everyone whose ancestry is from Africa returned to Africa... we'd have all the humans on Africa and nobody anywhere else. Livestock everywhere else would starve and we'd have to work very quickly toward building more houses and infrastructure. I like the plan where everyone shows their colours and racism dies the last of its slow death, better. Or maybe we could get the Europeans out of the US? ...Good futures all round.