Let's clarify some things:

• This is criminal, not civil. The board of directors and executive leadership should be held criminally liable.
• polluting waters directly leads to suffering and death on a mass scale. It would not an exaggeration to compare it to a weapon of mass destruction.
• the board of directors and executive leadership are, therefore, mass murderers and should be prosecuted as such.
• the business should be dissolved and sold off. Major shareholders should be on the hook to repair all the damage done by the company.

Until we all start internalizing this way of thinking, nothing will ever change. Fines will not fix anything. The corporate shield is a lie. When your company kills people at this scale, your liability shielding is irrelevant.

Download Signal Private Messenger.

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/signal-private-messenger/id874139669

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.thoughtcrime.securesms

https://signal.org/android/apk/

Create local groups.

Organize there.

Migrate any sensitive discussion to Signal. If possible, migrate all messaging to encrypted traffic. By using encrypted traffic you safeguard encrypted tactical exchange via obfuscation. A drop in an ocean is less identifiable than a drop in a pond.

Always turn on disappearing messages. Have a backup mechanism for when they take down Signal, as it is inevitable.

You've been invaded. Act accordingly.

This paper is shit.

https://jhap.du.ac.ir/article_488_8e072972f66d1fb748b47244c4813c86.pdf

They proved absolutely nothing.

For instance, they treat physics as a formal axiomatic system, which is fine for a human model of the physical world, but not for the physical world itself.

You can't say something is "unprovable" and make a logical leap to saying it is "physically undecidable." Gödel-incompleteness produces unprovable sentences inside a formal system, it doesn’t imply that physical observables correspond to those sentences.

I could go on but the paper is 12 short pages of non-sequiturs and logical leaps, with references to invoke formality, it's a joke that an article like this is being passed around and taken as reality.

So they discovered faulty code and made some money?

Can anyone explain to me how this is illegal?

The code is a contract. If someone writes bad code and loses money, then write better code - just like if someone writes a bad legal contract and loses money.

The justice system is awful.

Buddhism has a more Christian example of Christ-like behavior concerning a "living being Satan". That is to say, if "living being Jesus" was real, he would be a Bodhisattva, perhaps akin to Kṣitigarbha.

In the story, Bodhisattva Kṣitigarbha vowed:

“Until the hells are empty, I will not become a Buddha.

Only when all sentient beings are saved will I attain enlightenment.”

It is a vow to never abandon any being regardless of their state.

I like that idea. Boundless love and compassion doesn't stop at the bounds of some hell. It is boundless. It has boundless time, so it will spend an eternity reaching out to even cyclic hells.

Only kind of true.

If they did implement all those measures, all you do is launch a puppet browser rendered off screen and scrape the content you want. This could work for any site and it is impossible for anyone to detect.

For ads, as a nuclear option, you can detect when they occur and black the stream out.

I would personally do this if left with no other option.

This is not correct.

As an example, have you had the smallpox vaccine? It is effective for about 10 years before the effectiveness reduces, so a top up is needed.

The anthrax vaccine? It needs 3 or 4 doses and regular top ups, and it only gives resistance.

The tetanus vaccine? It lasts about 10 years also.

Lots if vaccines have a time period where they grant primarily resistance. In the case of something like anthrax, the objective is to make it largely survivable.

I know you used a lot of your logic to arrive where tou are, so hopefully this additional information allows you to arrive at a better conclusion.

A third of games? What are you smoking?

Over 95% of games in my experience work on Linux, and perform better than windows.

What kind of people are still using Windows, anyway? That supports one of the most terrible companies on the planet, invades your privacy, worms into your brain, and takes over your hardware...all for your 1 or 2 games you want to play?

This Steam Machine is going to be a blowout success. Linux gaming is superior in nearly every way. It's cheaper, it's more ethical, and it gives you back control.

It is simple.

It produces significantly less data. It doesn't have all the apps you are being tracked by reporting on your every move.

It doesn't have faceid, and probably has a lot of exploits (less security), but the data it holds isn't worth securing and it doesn't provide a non-stop datamine (more privacy).

Basically, instead of having a large safe filled with gold, you have a duffel-bag with your old gym clothes. You don't need security for old gym clothes.

Is there a functional difference between what's happening and martial law?

Okay?

So let me get this straight. A society of billions should grovel at the feet of these specific human meatbags, filled with the same blood, brains, hearts, and other mammalian organic matter as the rest of us...because they are immature little shits?

Is this correct?

They aren't and can't force anyone to do anything. That is a choice everyone is making. They are tiny, minuscule little insects who would vanish with a thought if humanity chose so.

I can't wait for our planet to wake up.

That's correct. We can't put the genie back in the bottle. We have to increase our mastery of it instead.

The core relationship is rather simple and needs to be redefined. Remote compute does not assign numbers to any of us, we provide them with identities we create.

All data allowances are revokable. Systems need to be engineered to make the flow of data transparent and easy to manage.

No one can censor us to other people without the consent of the viewer. This means moderation needs to be redefined. We subscribe to moderation, and it is curated towards what we individually want to see. No one makes the choice for us on what we can and cannot see.

This among much more in the same thread of thinking is needed. Power back to the people, entrenched by mastery.

When you think like this more and more the pattern becomes clearer, and you know what technology to look for. The nice thing is, all of this is possible right now at our current tech level. That can bring a lot of hope.

They can't do that because of accessibility reasons. If they did that, a disabled person has grounds to sue them for proper aria hints & controls.

It doesn't matter what kind of content it is, either. It must be made accessible.

“The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth — whether it’s scientific truth, or historical truth, or personal truth! It is the guiding principle on which Starfleet is based.”

“We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity.” — Jean-Luc Picard

Some of the basic tenants of Star Trek society are inclusion and shared progress. Elitism and exclusion are how we got to the mess we find ourselves in.

A better lesson is responsibility for the "nerds." You all sold your talents and abilities to salespeople and conmen instead of seeing the value in yourself. Then, you got manipulated into building a dystopian technology that entraps the common people instead of liberating them.

They needed guidance and you gave them your insecurity instead. The evil desires the technology as it is does not have the intellect to manufacture it. That requires complicit "nerds."

They are clearly incompetent.

That said, generally speaking, pursuing a truth-seeking LLM is actually sensible, and it can actually be done. What is surprising is that no one is currently doing that.

A truth-seeking LLM needs ironclad data. It cannot scrape social media at all. It needs training incentive to validate truth above satisfying a user, which makes it incompatible with profit seeking organizations. It needs to tell a user "I do not know" and also "You are wrong," among other user-displeasing phrases.

To get that data, you need a completely restructured society. Information must be open source. All information needs cryptographically signed origins ultimately being traceable to a credentialed source. If possible, the information needs physical observational evidence ("reality anchoring").

That's the short of it. In other words, with the way everything is going, we will likely not see a "real" LLM in our lifetime. Society is degrading too rapidly and all the money is flowing to making LLMs compliant. Truth seeking is a very low priority to people, so it is a low priority to the machine these people make.

But the concept itself? Actually a good one, if the people saying it actually knew what "truth" meant.

No matter what your downvotes say or the ridicule you face, what you are saying is correct.

If the general consensus had a functioning rational mind, our world wouldn't be boiling, corporations would be under control, and we'd all be living significantly happier lives.

Unfortunately, that isn't reality.

By extension, in general, the majority population isn't capable of reasoning through these things. So you will have an unpopular opinion until that changes, hopefully before the irreversible death of humanity on this planet.

This reminds me of the spike in cellular biophoton emissions during mitosis.

Biophoton emissions, basically a faint glow of light emitted by living cells due to metabolic processes, increase sharply at the moment a cell replicates into two cells. It appears as a flash if observing these emissions.

There is a lot to learn about our ideal society by observing our biological processes. The human body is a good example of a functioning mass-scale social substrate. The representative sample that guides the body is billions of neurons. Considering a human body has around 37 trillion cells, and roughly 170 billion brain cells (86 billion neurons + 85 billion non-neural brain cells), that gives us around a 200:1 representative sample. For every 200 cells, there is 1 representative.

Fascinating, isn't it? Dunbar's number states humans can only keep track of a limited number of relationships. That number is a cognitive limit of around 150 stable relationships that we can keep track of. The limit's range has been stretched to 100 - 250 stable relationships.

In other words...the ratio of brain cells to other cells is nearly the same as Dunbar's number. It is reasonable to conclude, then, for a functioning society (because human bodies are far more functional than our planetary society), we need to have a ratio limit on representation. That limit is 200:1. For every 200 people, we need 1 representative.

For the US, for example, with 347 million people, a stable government would need 1.7 million representatives. Sounds crazy, doesn't it, compared to the ass backwards mechanism at play now? But think about it for a bit, and you will find why it is so stable.

That is too many people for an elite to control. It is too many to be corrupted. It adds redundancy. It adds direct accountability, each rep would have a personal relationship with their people, because it is within the Dunbar limit of what they can keep track of.

Something to think about.

Bitcoin was publicly released with full code and no pre-mining. It could not be patented for this reason.

The original creator is still unknown and has never moved their coins.

This strategy is the way.

It will open PC gaming to people who couldn't access it before. It isn't for people who know how to build their own PCs, although even people who are tech experts would still want this sort of device.

This makes it easy for tech and tech adjacent people to recommend PC gaming to people with no tech ability.

That's why it will be a blowout success. The Steam ecosystem is superior to every console gaming platform. Now we will have hardware that competes and exceeds current gen consoles with no maintenance or tech-nerd complications.

The steam deck was great but its specs made it a difficult sell when recommending it to people. You have to tweak a lot of settings and mess with stuff that most people don't want to do.

This will change all of that.

Remind yourself in two years, and let's see where it goes. I should still be here. Let's touch base in 2 years.

This is true. However, it does not change that your original statement was false.

In the US military, an anthrax vaccine was mandatory for a time upon deploying the Middle East. It is a very painful vaccine that makes anthrax survivable, but anthrax will still do a lot of damage regardless. I would say this is very similar to the results we see with the covid vaccine, though the covid vaccine is actually much more effective.

Notice I correctly use the word "vaccine" for both of these. A vaccine is simply a biological preparation that gives our immune system exposure to train against a real threat, without experiencing the adverse impacts of the real threat itself.

You may add qualifiers to the "vaccine" word, such as a "permanent, one-dose vaccine." Now you've correctly established an appropriate context to properly communicate what you mean correctly

I have found in life it is better to remain silent when I have doubt, than to spread false information.

Here is a small tip: regardless of the controversy around AI, a helpful way to use it is to state something you think as fact, and double check with the AI. This provides you with a more objective medium without needing to experience public embarrassment or offending people.

Good luck!