Quote from: RC5908 on October 28, 2014, 08:10:44 PMQuote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 08:04:41 PMQuote from: challengerX on October 28, 2014, 08:01:53 PMQuote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 07:59:24 PMQuote from: challengerX on October 28, 2014, 07:55:02 PMIf you think it's impossible for humanity to progress at a rate fast enough to automate the majority of jobs way before a thousand years timea thousand yearsNope.Compare 100 years ago to today and we're going at a pace that's almost unprecedented.And again, it will slow down. How hard is that to understand? Even Moore's Law is expected to die in a few decades.The death of Moore's law doesn't mean the death of exponential increases in processing power.Only initially. Eventually it'll decrease.
Quote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 08:04:41 PMQuote from: challengerX on October 28, 2014, 08:01:53 PMQuote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 07:59:24 PMQuote from: challengerX on October 28, 2014, 07:55:02 PMIf you think it's impossible for humanity to progress at a rate fast enough to automate the majority of jobs way before a thousand years timea thousand yearsNope.Compare 100 years ago to today and we're going at a pace that's almost unprecedented.And again, it will slow down. How hard is that to understand? Even Moore's Law is expected to die in a few decades.The death of Moore's law doesn't mean the death of exponential increases in processing power.
Quote from: challengerX on October 28, 2014, 08:01:53 PMQuote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 07:59:24 PMQuote from: challengerX on October 28, 2014, 07:55:02 PMIf you think it's impossible for humanity to progress at a rate fast enough to automate the majority of jobs way before a thousand years timea thousand yearsNope.Compare 100 years ago to today and we're going at a pace that's almost unprecedented.And again, it will slow down. How hard is that to understand? Even Moore's Law is expected to die in a few decades.
Quote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 07:59:24 PMQuote from: challengerX on October 28, 2014, 07:55:02 PMIf you think it's impossible for humanity to progress at a rate fast enough to automate the majority of jobs way before a thousand years timea thousand yearsNope.Compare 100 years ago to today and we're going at a pace that's almost unprecedented.
Quote from: challengerX on October 28, 2014, 07:55:02 PMIf you think it's impossible for humanity to progress at a rate fast enough to automate the majority of jobs way before a thousand years timea thousand years
If you think it's impossible for humanity to progress at a rate fast enough to automate the majority of jobs way before a thousand years time
Quote from: RC5908 on October 28, 2014, 08:14:45 PMQuote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 08:14:07 PMQuote from: RC5908 on October 28, 2014, 08:10:44 PMQuote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 08:04:41 PMQuote from: challengerX on October 28, 2014, 08:01:53 PMQuote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 07:59:24 PMQuote from: challengerX on October 28, 2014, 07:55:02 PMIf you think it's impossible for humanity to progress at a rate fast enough to automate the majority of jobs way before a thousand years timea thousand yearsNope.Compare 100 years ago to today and we're going at a pace that's almost unprecedented.And again, it will slow down. How hard is that to understand? Even Moore's Law is expected to die in a few decades.The death of Moore's law doesn't mean the death of exponential increases in processing power.Only initially. Eventually it'll decrease.Dunno bout that mang.Once you get to quantum computing, there's not much more you can do to fit more transistors onto a chip.
Quote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 08:14:07 PMQuote from: RC5908 on October 28, 2014, 08:10:44 PMQuote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 08:04:41 PMQuote from: challengerX on October 28, 2014, 08:01:53 PMQuote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 07:59:24 PMQuote from: challengerX on October 28, 2014, 07:55:02 PMIf you think it's impossible for humanity to progress at a rate fast enough to automate the majority of jobs way before a thousand years timea thousand yearsNope.Compare 100 years ago to today and we're going at a pace that's almost unprecedented.And again, it will slow down. How hard is that to understand? Even Moore's Law is expected to die in a few decades.The death of Moore's law doesn't mean the death of exponential increases in processing power.Only initially. Eventually it'll decrease.Dunno bout that mang.
Quote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 08:20:39 PMQuote from: RC5908 on October 28, 2014, 08:14:45 PMQuote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 08:14:07 PMQuote from: RC5908 on October 28, 2014, 08:10:44 PMQuote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 08:04:41 PMQuote from: challengerX on October 28, 2014, 08:01:53 PMQuote from: DustinTimeForBed on October 28, 2014, 07:59:24 PMQuote from: challengerX on October 28, 2014, 07:55:02 PMIf you think it's impossible for humanity to progress at a rate fast enough to automate the majority of jobs way before a thousand years timea thousand yearsNope.Compare 100 years ago to today and we're going at a pace that's almost unprecedented.And again, it will slow down. How hard is that to understand? Even Moore's Law is expected to die in a few decades.The death of Moore's law doesn't mean the death of exponential increases in processing power.Only initially. Eventually it'll decrease.Dunno bout that mang.Once you get to quantum computing, there's not much more you can do to fit more transistors onto a chip.Miniaturizing transistors isn't the only way to increase computing power. Software optimization is much more important.
I'm still waiting for him to demonstrate how China is communist by either Marx and Engel's measures or by the Oxford English Dictionary's.He's failed on both counts, thus far.
You have the elimination of differing political parties with the establishment of a single party to which everybody is part of, thus eliminating the concept of class war.
In 2007, the Property Law of the People's Republic of China was passed which essentially created three differing forms of property: state, collective, and private. State is pretty simple as it's the pubic/government control and because essentially all people belong to the Communist Party and the C.P controls the government, therefore all people have access to this land. Collective is the concept of people working the land together under the guidance of the government, thus making it public land. Private is a tad different as it grants some private property. HOWEVER, this law does not overrule the system of land tenure where the government still has control over all land (remember, the government=people, making it all public)
"Each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs" is simple as 1+1=2; China is a manufacturing and agricultural society so people are essentially split between those two fields of work and paid
Meta, would you still disagree with Kinder if you made the distinction between political communism and theoretical communism?
China is Communist
Quote from: Kinder on October 28, 2014, 10:41:49 PMChina is Communisthttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadomasochism
Quote from: Kinder on October 28, 2014, 10:41:49 PMChina is CommunistWAR IS PEACE.FREEDOM IS SLAVERY. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.
Okay, Kinder. I'm not going to push the point further. You believe whatever you want about the Chinese government.
Quote from: Meta Cognition on October 29, 2014, 11:38:50 AMOkay, Kinder. I'm not going to push the point further. You believe whatever you want about the Chinese government.God damn it's so fucking easy to get your dick in a knot. I know China isn't Communist, but thanks for giving me a good laugh and a ride
Quote from: Kinder on October 29, 2014, 11:43:52 AMQuote from: Meta Cognition on October 29, 2014, 11:38:50 AMOkay, Kinder. I'm not going to push the point further. You believe whatever you want about the Chinese government.God damn it's so fucking easy to get your dick in a knot. I know China isn't Communist, but thanks for giving me a good laugh and a ride
thanks for giving me a good ride
Quote from: Kinder on October 29, 2014, 11:43:52 AMQuote from: Meta Cognition on October 29, 2014, 11:38:50 AMOkay, Kinder. I'm not going to push the point further. You believe whatever you want about the Chinese government.God damn it's so fucking easy to get your dick in a knot. I know China isn't Communist, but thanks for giving me a good laugh and a rideTHIS FUCKING DAMAGE CONTROL OH MY FUCKING ALLAH
After I've quite expliclty stated I don't care anymore, why do you feel the need to try and expose yourself as le rusemaster? It just looks like you're engaging in some serious damage control and nobody will believe you, and you're just further destroying your own reputation. Even if I take you at face value, it's still incredibly asinine and juvenile to try and rustle some jimmies by adopted a blatantly false idea. Especially since you didn't anger me. It doesn't make you look smart, just quite pathetic. Other than that, I have nothing more to say. This really is a non-issue to me now.
If China is communist, then they're definitely doing something right to increase their GDP by 10% every year.
YOU'RE NOT A LIBERAL
