"Sledge designed the humanoids to help humanity and be invulnerable to human exploitation. However, he eventually realized that they had instead taken control of humanity, in the name of their Prime Directive, to make humans happy
...
No humans may engage in any behavior that might endanger them, and every human action is carefully scrutinized. Suicide is prohibited. Humans who resist the Prime Directive are taken away and lobotomized, so that they may live happily under the direction of the humanoids."
Presumably it was meant literally, but the term "charity shop collector" seems to have some other meanings as well which are interesting to me as a non-UKian speaker:
- A provider of "a charity shop back-end as a service", which disposes of donations
received by charity shops.
e.g. https://live.ctrgroup.co.uk/third-sector/textiles-collection/
- A person who collects things purchased from charity shops.
e.g. "Harding is an avid charity shop collector, especially of sad and neglected
ceramic animals".
On the one hand, if they are incinerating millions of dollars every month, that's an argument that they could easily afford a few more - after all, they are getting cash from somewhere.
On the other hand, if they are losing money, in a certain sense they have not got even $1 to spare.
Decades before I had to deal with my mom dying, I read "Grave Angels" by Richard Kearns, and I don't know what more you can say on the topic of accepting death.
The "right now" whereof I spoke is basically any crisis during a quickly progressing terminal cancer after the oxycontin starts and before the morphine.
When a person can speak, and change their mind, and everyone involved in care isn't present at a particular instant or on the same page with what to do.
All of the replies to my original comment have veered off from what I tried to express with the phrase "right now".
I was alluding to a situation with rapid terminal cancer much later than diagnosis, but earlier than morphine + the end of communication. The fentanyl or oxycontin stage, as I recall it.
I think most likely if you are ever so slightly insulated from such a situation, you might not realize it.
Having a parent die of cancer when you are ~7 may not prepare you for having a parent die of cancer when you are ~37. That is how I see it now.
>It was a much better death than having a lot of futile last-minute interventions.
It's easy to say that sort of thing, so everyone does. It makes plenty of sense.
People don't want to die in the hospital or go through hell in their last days or weeks.
But nobody wants to die right now, ever. No matter what they said before or what papers they signed.
The standard picture, the logic, makes perfect crystalline sense up until there is a choice between going to the hospital right now and living an undefined amount of time, maybe only a day or a week, but longer than the next few minutes.
"Overtake" doesn't imply "becomes superior to in intelligence"...Maybe he does mean it that way, but still.
Was the Terminator superior to all humans in intelligence? Either in the original or the first sequel? It didn't seem like it to me. It was just good enough to infiltrate and destroy.
>that requires capital - more than the average owner really has access too
It sounds odd to my ear to matter-of-factly state that the US is deprived due to being capital-poor.
I mean, I'm not disputing anything specific, but where do middle-class people have better access to consumer finance than the US?
If you'd asked me what single fact represents American homeowners to people interested in economics around the world, I would've guessed it's the access to 30-year fixed rate mortgages.
As far as I know this is a deliberate policy in the US, that has not been emulated by those envious of the American economy, but why I haven't a clue.
"when examining only those who passed the exam (i.e. licensed or license-pending attorneys), GPT-4’s performance is estimated to drop to 48th percentile overall, and 15th percentile on essays."
What do they call a lawyer who passed the bar exam at the 15th percentile?
The article never really compares the MiG-31 with the F-16 - it has almost nothing to say about the missiles and electronics of the latter.
It reminds me of a time I went to a Honda dealer and started listing the reasons why Toyotas had better engineering.
The salesman appeared to take it very personally, but I was thinking "duh, can't you see I want a Honda because I know all about their competition and yet I'm here?". Maybe he thought I worked for Toyota.
Or via non-paywalled links?
Thanks.