No one is saying the Republican’s aren’t worse. But you can’t rightly say that it’s just the Republicans who are anti-science. Plenty of liberals have their own anti-science blindspots and some of those blindspots, like the anti-vaccine movement, are insanely dangerous.

It’s not a competition. It’s a problem. And if…

Finally the technology to recreate some of the worst episode of Flash and Arrow come to life!

EDIT: God damn it, sorry. This was supposed to be a reply to mcchilders737 below. The comments section seems to be making me reply to comments at the top of a particular thread rather than the ones I’m trying to actually reply to.

When I saw we can’t understand it, that may make it like magic or it may not. Because we can’t understand superintelligence, we don’t know what it’s capable of. We assume it’s capable of a lot, but that’s really just a guess. It could be, because we have no way of understanding or properly estimating…

Regarding rerouting, it may be possible to a limited degree but an organic brain is actually more capable of rerouting itself than an electrical one. Circuits and wires are immutable unless someone physically moves them. Neurons can die off, be replaced, and grow new connections to each other. An AI could do some…

“But given this story, Novice and Experts alike are just giving theories, and as such both are equally valid at this point.”

I’d argue the point about onscreen exposition. I’d say its use in Blade Runner (another film I’m sure Bickle here would like to see trimmed down...) was... okay, maybe not perfect, but it allowed for the rest of the characters to go about their day without having to slip exposition into their dialog to help the viewer…

Call me a grumpy old bastard but I think that’d be an awful film. Just because I hate that silly underdog narrative that gets shoved into films all the time.

Actually, crap like this story is part of the reason I hate that narrative...

From what I know (and I’m certainly a non-expert here) the flat Earth wasn’t even religious dogma. I believe (and, again, I could be wrong, this is from vague memory) that at the time it was the clergy where were more likely to know the Earth was round from having studied the Greeks.

The idea of Geocentrism certainly…

There’s a key difference between limited imagination and knowledge. When experts say “No, that’s wrong because of [reasons]” they’re usually right. Even if they’re not good at thinking of new stuff, the stuff they already know is usually pretty solid. Not always, but usually.

It looks different because of confirmation…

Scientists almost never say anything more than “This is probably x” because... well even established science isn’t 100%, for sure, a fact. We think Einstein’s ideas about relativity are correct. We think it really hard. We’d be really, really surprised if they weren’t. Technically we don’t know.

Which is part of the…

Except that most educated people knew the world was round since very early history. There was very little actual controversy there. Geocentrism is where the controversy was. Where it was the person who actually did the research and knew what he was talking about who was right. Galileo had incontrovertible evidence…

The teen then went on to call the scientists “lame” and say that he was very good at the science and that the loser scientists were being unfairly critical. He added that he would make Canadian science great again.

Well it might try to. That doesn’t mean it can. Like, I’d LOVE to disable my ability to contract Alzheimers. But even assuming I know exactly how the disease works, and exactly what I’d need to do to prevent it... I still lack the means to physically do it.

Besides being emergency measures, I don’t see the situations being comparable.

Besides, I always hated that quote. If life found a way, no one would need to clone dinosaurs. Life would have found a way to avoid extinction, and we’d still have ‘em. (But they wouldn’t kill us all, because life would find a way.)

Okay, I’ve not seen Terminator, so maybe there are answers to some of these questions but... the whole Skynet thing always confused me. Where is Skynet getting these killbots from? Isn’t starting a nuclear war going to create EMP blasts that are likely to disable vital infrastructure for Skynet? Skynet wants to…

I think “it will figure out how to engineer humans” is remarkably optimistic. Humans are hard to manipulate and understand, and intelligence doesn’t really help. People who are very smart, but lack the ability to pick up on social cues have a very, very hard time. An AI is not going to be designed to pick up on those…

Well you can always force an error 482 (somebody shot the server with a 12-gauge) message.

The problem with AI making their own power plants or batteries is that they have no hands. They need humans to make it for them. And once the AI starts trying to make sure you can’t shut it down preemptively... well that’s when…

I’ve said this on other articles about AI, but I’ll say it again: Why does anyone give a toss what Stephen Hawking thinks? Last I checked, the man was a physicist, not a Professional Smart Guy. Unless it turns out he also has expertise in the field of AI (which maybe he does. If he does, feel free to let me know, and…

Everything is a more pragmatic superweapon than the Death Star. There is no reason you ever need to destroy an entire planet. That’s just wasted firepower. All you need to do is burn away the habitable layers.