My suspicion is that it’s abiogenesis, but it’s only a suspicion that I can’t have any certainty of

Id say yes to that statement, but for reasons that dont have to do with AI as I dont really view AI training as piracy.

I mean, raptors

Would this even be necessary for automated ordering anyway? Given that every company under the sun wants you to use some app of theirs these days, including fast food companies, Im kinda surprised they dont just get rid of the speaker/microphone system, and just put a sign with a qr code in front of the drive through telling you to download and use their app to put in a drive through order

This is like a lame version of that Dr Who episode where the Master turns everyone on earth into himself

echidna I understand, but why cat?

Title that ignores its own article clearly, given what was talked about was something that hypothetically might allow a warp drive without exotic matter, but which moves at slower than light speeds and therefore still is not an ftl device.

Ah, sounds like someone going for the herostratus approach to fame

In that it uses sunlight and large mirrors, but it should deliver more thrust, but also require some propellant. Also should be able to fire in any direction, depending on how the mirrors are able to pivot to focus on the propellant chamber.

Israel is not Judaism and criticism of it is not criticism of Jewish people as a whole. To hold otherwise is to hold an entire people responsible for the actions of a few (those in the Israeli government), that those people often have no or only limited influence over, which would be an inherently bigoted position to take because it robs those people of their agency. If anything, the Israeli government itself is being antisemitic in a sense by pushing such a narrative in order to use Jewish people as a whole as a shield against criticism of their actions.

I’m guessing you misread the title as animals instead of mammals, and then didn’t read the actual post text

The issue I have with stances like this is that, well, politics are not inconsequential. Its not like being on different sides of a game, where everyone is equally in the right and one side winning or losing changes little. The consequences to political policy are far reaching, nuanced, and can literally be life and death to some, even if the policy seems boring or inconsequential. Some stances therefore are going to seem so heinous to someone with an opposing stance that there really cant simply be an “agree to disagree”, its more a “we work together on this, or we work against eachother”. And if youre working against someone in a matter that can be life and death, that someone is almost definitionally your enemy, regardless of genetic similarity. Humans only have so much capacity in their lives for close relationships with other people. If you cant stand someone, it therefore makes sense to use that capacity to maintain ties with someone you do get along with. Being born around a certain person is not an obligation to stay with them.

Something to remember I think is that just because people on both sides of an issue talk the same way about the other side, does not inherently mean that both or neither have a point.

Admittedly not, no. I was making the assumption, possibly a naive one, that a computer should be capable of understanding the physics behind bullet trajectories well enough to shoot accurately even if the target is mobile.

I didn’t really think human operated, I was imagining something pretty much exactly like phalanx, but with a much smaller caliber and turret size owing to the small size of drones. Like a phalanx type software controller mounted to a small turret with a small caliber machinegun or automatic shotgun type weapon.

If you can target them with a laser though, why would a gun be much different? I know there’s dramatically more travel time, but bullets are still extremely fast, and even if one shot misses, something like a machinegun with a computerized control system seems like it ought to hit the thing before too long? Maybe the risk of missed shots causing harm might be too high for populated areas?

Is it just me, or does that discussion of the various ways to counter drones, kinda miss the obvious of just shooting them with a conventional gun?

Pumpkins I’m curious about. All I can even think of to do with a pumpkin is pie, though I’m sure there’s probably more traditionally done with them

The point of building nukes isn’t really to launch a nuke at someone, it’s to make others decide that attacking you is too risky. Missile defense isn’t perfect, so even if it probably would stop them, there’s still a risk one gets through, that someone would have to take into consideration before launching an attack. It’s even more a threat against Isreal, since they have less time to intercept, and even one missile getting through would destroy a comparatively larger fraction of the country, being that it’s fairly small.

Youre wrong on all counts there, but most importantly to the actual topic of discussion, a negotiated settlement in which the aggressor is just given some of the territory they are attempting to conquer (which is exactly what a negotiated settlement between Ukraine and Russia as the war has gone thus far would have been, because what else could Ukraine have possibly offered to convince Russia that it was worth it to give up their attack?) is not a wish for peace, its a wish for appeasement. It sounds like peace at first glance, sure, but by rewarding aggressive action, it gives every incentive for the aggressor to simply attack again later, in the hope of gaining more concessions. If this kind of policy led to peace, there never would have been a second world war. I do not like war the way you seem to think, but I do not want it tomorrow either. Ensuring that there is as little incentive as possible for those with the means to start them to do so, requires that those that start wars are not allowed to gain by doing so, and Russia has indisputably started this one, therefore to ensure peace, it must lose.

It would be great if all peace took was for everyone involved to sit down and talk, but as you say, the world is not like that.