"The Emmy Awards, or Emmys, are an extensive range of awards for artistic and technical merit for the television industry."(Emphasis mine).

Wow. Nothing screams confidence quite like platform-X needing to play its own awards show on platform-Y just to get enough eyes to make it worth the effort. So cooked the smoke detector battery already went dead.

"None of y'all watch any of what we're going to talk about tonight, but hey, we have a second-rate comedian hosting, and maybe a band or two if they can get rides from the nursing home! And, uh, one of the regu... uh... recurring Seinfeld cast is in the audience tonight! Your parents couldn't get enough of it!"

Thinking about this from a biological perspective since both male and female participants had the same behavior... I wonder if its because the earliest voices most people ever hear are those of their mothers, while still in utero. After birth, we primarily will hear our mothers' voice while breastfeeding. Even the most well intentioned and involved dad probably doesn't get nearly so much voice time with a little one. I wonder if humans are especially attuned to feeling the uncanny valley with female voices over male because of all that early exposure? So, the female agent voices are perceived as "lower quality"?

NGL, I'm definitely liberal-leaning, yet I sincerely believed the "pay gap" was 99% explained by reproductive status and a general willingness to negotiate more aggressively for better pay (or similarly, willingness to apply for more aspirational jobs beyond the applicant's qualifications and experience level)>

The former is clearly protected under Title VII, but that doesn't change the physical reality of someone who left the workforce for five years having five years' less experience than their peers. The latter is a much harder social indoctrination (or maybe just a testosterone) problem.

This new study though... Holy shit, that's pretty black-and-white! Barring some non-obvious methodological issues, there's nothing here to argue with. We now have concrete data that even the label "male" or "female" applied to a genderless construct adversely affects perceived value.

Finally, a sane voice among the noise! The arguments about "which" time we keep are slowly killing us all from inaction year after year after year. "Perfect is the enemy of good".

I seriously couldn't care less if we go to permanent standard time, permanent DST, or hell, just ditch time zones altogether and go to permanent global UTC. It makes no difference whatsoever whether we wake up at 6am EST, 7am EDT, or 11am UTC, they're all the same damned thing from a biological perspective.

The only approach that isn't perfectly fine is resetting the clocks multiple times each year because some morons can't stand the idea of waking up at "2:30am" even though that's still roughly their local dawn.

You know what's aligned even more with circadian biology? Just redefine local noon as always solar noon.

Ditch the half-assed system we have now, get up off your ass, and change your clocks once a day without whinging like a precious snowflake.

Keep the time constant the year around and if there are reasons that certain workers or schools should start an hour earlier in summer then change their times by an hour.

There's an entire grey-market industry of rich assholes traveling to third world countries for "young blood" transfusions.

Funny thing is, it apparently works and the current study is just one more bit of proof. One quick trip to Ecuador and bam, 70+ year olds get six months of being as healthy as a 30-something again. Hell, I have to admit some mornings I'm tempted to try it myself, though I'm nowhere near wealthy enough to fly halfway around the world every few months.

I'm sorry you're getting downvoted, because I get what you're saying and largely agree (though I love programming and have zero interest in working as a meat proxy / reverse centaur).

The problem here is, you're describing a world where human labor is worthless. And I'm okay with that in the abstract; I harbor no delusions about the "nobility" of work for its own sake. Know who won't be okay with that (labor-cost-savings aside), however? The billionaires with a vested interest in preserving cut-throat capitalism who currently own all the frontier AIs.

Are we on the verge of a post-scarcity society? Maybe. Are the guys dangling that carrot, while building massive survival bunkers as quickly as possible, the same folks who have the most to lose from exactly that? Absolutely. It'd be awfully nice if we could get there without half the human population starving to death in the process.

The headline is reasonable if we all agree that AI gives us something worth the down sides. We do not.

Few outside the billionaires of Silicon Valley actually believe the hype. The average Joe is largely annoyed when their favorite productivity tools suddenly have "Smarter Clippy" shoehorned in. Or talk with some of AI's heaviest users (programmers) and you'll hear a pretty common theme: "Wow, Claude makes it easy to hit my Q3 targets, bummer it's going to put us all out of work (or far, far worse) five years from now."

Correction, no, you're right, I did assert some problems are imaginary. Only the truly mentally ill could look down, see a penis or a vagina and wonder "what the fuck am i?"

Yeah, THAT'S an imaginary problem of the dumbest order.

If we eliminated the second and fourth through eighth amendments to the US constitution, Uncle Sam would have a much easier time solving crimes. Nobody is disputing that. We as a society, however, have deemed it unacceptable for jackbooted thugs to kick down our - your - doors at any time without due process protections. We would prefer some crimes go unsolved over living in a constant state of fear toward an uncontrollable police state.

If you live in a high-crime area, I have some bad news for you - The USSC has bluntly stated the police have no "duty to protect". The police could already be doing far more to help you, and are instead choosing to focus on high-value property crimes over keeping you and your neighbors safe. Do you really believe they just need one more civil rights eroding tool to finally convince them to make a good faith effort at doing their damned jobs?

What you need is the erasure of the "thin blue line", not more ALPRs to allow the police to focus even more exclusively on crimes against the rich.

So you don't really have any refutation other than "I'm sad".

I didn't say people whine about imaginary problems. Their problems are absolutely real.
YOU'RE the one endorsing catastrophism. The problems they're facing - we don't have enough money, we work too hard, etc, etc - are NOT unusual, are NOT new, & never before (afaik) in human history caused this sort of a wave of infantilism "well fine then I guess I just can't have kids! mwhaa!"

It's taken a lot, but the leftists have managed to convince an entire generation that they're exceptionally incapable and unable to save themselves, just so you can offer Caesarism and the Great Nanny State to take care of them. Brilliant, I have to say. Fucking sadistic, but hey, it wins you power so I guess you win?

Altman is hardly likely to come proclaim AI is a shell game with enormous potential to ruin lives. Because he's got his bank account and personal enrichment to worry about. The grift will perpetuated by his ilk until the bubble collapses or they and their company becomes criminally and financially liable for the consequences.

Pretty sure whatever he died from came from bats. Or hamsters.

There's no reason to leap to the conclusion that whatever killed him was because he was actually working directly on it. That would be irresponsible.

LOL yeah botched execution. "First all female execution team at request of Pike"

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fnypost.com%2F2026%2F10%2F01%2F...