I’m curious how it’s considered a “layoff” if it’s based on performance rather than the job itself being eliminated.

Krombiception, of course.

…you do have krombiception, don’t you?

“Not do anything useful” would be more accurate than “do nothing”. But that’s just my tl;dr.

[…] the resolution also contains many unbalanced, inaccurate, and unwise provisions the United States cannot support. This resolution does not articulate meaningful solutions for preventing hunger and malnutrition or avoiding their devastating consequences.

The United States is concerned that the concept of “food sovereignty” could justify protectionism or other restrictive import or export policies […]

We also do not accept any reading of this resolution or related documents that would suggest that States have particular extraterritorial obligations arising from any concept of a “right to food,” which we do not recognize and has no definition in international law.

https://usun.usmission.gov/explanation-of-vote-of-the-third-committee-adoption-of-the-right-to-food-resolution/

tl;dr:

1. The USA doesn’t think the resolution actually does anything useful, even if it supports the intention
2. The USA, the largest exporter of food, is concerned how the resolution might impact food exports
3. The USA doesn’t recognize the imposition of legal obligations to act outside of its own territory

But the resolution passed anyway, which is why world hunger has disappeared.

I am also that guy, and it was more like 17 years ago.

Reminds me of the old trick on HTML forms where you use CSS to make one of the form fields invisible to humans and reject any submission that filled in that field.

Man it sure is crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide.

Surprised the article didn’t point out that the “Tim” axis is also pointing in the wrong direction.

The economic bubble being created between the AI and hardware companies is going to pop and take out huge swathes of the broader economy, a la mortgages in 2008.

The problem is that an AI built to maximize paperclips might conclude that converting the planet to paperclips is an acceptable cost of maximizing paperclip production. It might understand why humans think it’s bad to convert the planet, but disagree. It would need to be explicitly programmed to prioritize human life over paperclips.

otherwise we would just switch it off

If it were super-intelligent, it could probably trick us into leaving it turned on.

A paperclip maximizer driven by self-preservation? What could possiblie go wrong?

Pirate King: HE DID?!? … oh… oh, yes so he did… I was there.

I could write a comment on this if you want.

Are there examples of censorship or prior restraint you’d like to highlight?

Ctrl-F “plato”

Required reading

?

I’m assuming the answer was wrong, but as a non-musician I don’t see it.

There is no such thing as an innocent billionaire.

Yet Trump can declassify documents by thought alone.