Quote from: Not a Dustbin on September 23, 2014, 04:18:47 PM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on September 23, 2014, 02:59:23 PM

Quote from: Not a Dustbin on September 23, 2014, 02:55:09 PM

Society wouldn't have to work, the government would supply credits that would go toward the various activities they could do with their time. Only a small few of the most intelligent would be given a job—the reward for them being knowledge.

My concerns lie chiefly in the transitory stage between society now and society following.

Also, intelligence would be of no economic importance - nothing human would be. When the mental capacity of machines outpaces that of humans, the economy will be totally devoid of people. We will, I imagine, end up with some sort of scarcity-based gift economy.

Well, I don't know why I'm speculating. I don't know. I hope I'll get to see the results, though.

By transition you mean mass lay offs and joblessness?

Yes. Alongside the inevitable contrast between rich and poor and the probable creation of an incredibly small class of uber-rich people.

I have no idea how the government is going to smoothly cope with that transition.

I mean couldn't the government just... ban robots?

Sounds a lot like a Platoniat's wet dream. Society wouldn't have to work, the government would supply credits that would go toward the various activities they could do with their time. Only a small few of the most intelligent would be given a job--the reward for them being knowledge.

I'm pretty sure that was debunked as coming from a human satellite.

Source?

I didn't see anything about it on the Wikipedia article.

Throughout all the time humanity has recorded the stars, only once has a signal ever beamed back to earth. That was the Wow! signal in 1977, recorded at the Ohio State University. It lasted for 72 seconds and it was never detected again after that. Essentially there are only really two possibilities of its origin; scientists have concluded it nearly impossible for a radio signal tight beamed as it was to be natural. That means it either came from humans or it came from a star system 200 lightyears away. The signal was broadcasted on a spectrum reserved for astronomical purposes, meaning it is forbidden for terrestrial transmitters to transmit. If it wasn't terrestrial, then it would mean the civilization that broadcasted the signal is highly advanced, potentially hundreds or thousands of years ahead of us technologically speaking. To put that in perspective, the transmitter required to emit this signal would have to be 2,200,000 kilowatts. The strongest transmitter on earth is only 2,500 kW.

35 years later we responded to the signal by sending 10,000 Twitter messages in the direction of the origin of the signal in order to show the potential lifeforms that we are intelligent. But because we are 200 lightyears away, that means the signal was sent over 200 years ago, and it will take another 200 years for our message to get back to them, and we wouldn't even know until 200 years after that if they were to respond. And who knows if either of our civilizations will last that long before we we're wiped out by ourselves or some other catastrophic event.

I would speculate on this further, but I have to go to school and if this gets too long no will end up reading it anyway. So go ahead and discuss if you think the Wow! signal is extraterrestrial or not, and what it would mean if it is.

EDIT: Sorry for the incoherent-ness, I wrote this right after I woke up in the morning.

Quote from: Not a Dustbin on September 22, 2014, 10:25:02 PM

How exactly does this have anything to do with feminism? There really aren't that many pseudo-feminists with the agenda to eliminate women from the responsibility to legally intoxicate. In fact I wouldn't even classify that as pseudo-feminism more than it is just nutty. I mean it literally mentions no where that this is female exclusive, so how are you even attempting to make that connection and expecting people to go along with it?

Well, first of all it's a joke.

Second of all it's Richard Dawkins.

What's wrong with Richard Dawkings other than the fact he's a horrible scientific communicator?

I wonder if people are actually sitting here trying to solve this, lol.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29321136

I usually don't care about foreign policy because you're never given the full story, but this is kind of newsworthy right?

Some dumbass moderator universally muted me so no one can see my messages.

Quote from: Not a Dustbin on September 21, 2014, 10:46:00 PM

Scientists, engineers, and other technologists are the smartest and most valuable members of society.

lol

Well maybe not the most valuable, the most valuable are probably agriculturalists and water resource managers, but they easily are the most intelligent though. You don't get to dick around with opinions and beliefs, everything you do relies on hard math, theory, and tough problem solving.

I hate the term ethnic cleansing. Do you not know that people only came up with that term so that they could describe genocide without being obligated to anything about it?

lolno

Somebody ALWAYS owns a piece of land/building. If it's abandon then it's most likely owned by some bank

Those two sentences are contradictory. Property isn't always owned by a bank and if the owner truly does abandon it, then it's abandoned. It's actually not uncommon at all.

How exactly does this have anything to do with feminism? There really aren't that many pseudo-feminists with the agenda to eliminate women from the responsibility to legally intoxicate. In fact I wouldn't even classify that as pseudo-feminism more than it is just nutty. I mean it literally mentions no where that this is female exclusive, so how are you even attempting to make that connection and expecting people to go along with it?

>be outside in the freezing cold so long your skin gets dry

I'm 15 why would I play with a bunch of paedophiles??

Kill yourself.

I don't find her ass attractive at all. Not to mention how blatantly fake it is.