Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Yeah, for US Socialism means soviet union or fail republic in latin america and eastern Europe, not surprise there.
And in way they are right, here in Venezuela we try the old good socialism system and we are right now LA#1 shithole and unsurprisly people in the party put everything that isnt them in the "Ultra-right" box
So is maybe just a simple case of "there is two side in this conflict: me and the ones who are wrong"
"My Name is Bolt, Bolt Crank and I dont care if you believe or not"
Probably not been productive, as in producing value (GDP or otherwise). Since most of the work would be done by the machines, humans would almost certainly move to doing something else they'd rather be doing. It's also a question will they be allowed to work, since machines are far more trustworthy and precise.
Handmade cars and other stuff would be (as they're now) rarities.
edited 14th Jun '16 11:02:16 PM by TerminusEst
Si Vis Pacem, Para Perkele![]()
Not capable in the sense that they aren't capable of any tasks a machine can't do better at a lower cost. Automation, and more generally, artificial intelligence is a fundamentally different kind of transition than the industrial revolution, though its potential impact on society is even bigger. Whereas industrialization overcame the limitations of the human body, AI overcomes the limitations of the human mind, and, in time, will eventually render humans as we know them obsolete.
![]()
![]()
It's hard to say honestly how much of that is due to the measures taken by the United States against such regimes, both covert and overt. It'll be decades before we get to find out the full extent of the CIA's activities in Latin America during this period.
edited 14th Jun '16 11:08:53 PM by CaptainCapsase
Indeed but it create a intersting parallel with US right now: first the trust in the establehsment is low for what people consider faliures in recient years: 9/11, Irak,Afghanistan, the culture wars in states heat up a lot as LGBT and conservative religious people clash over and over by diferent issues this create a climate that generate Trump and in way, Berine oportunities in political field: people are just fed up in how thing happen and just want to stop, not matter how
How convenient, blaming socialism's failures on this mysterious unseen force and not the readily visible effects of their policies.
edited 15th Jun '16 12:31:27 AM by Stormtroper
And that's how I ended up in the wardrobe. It Just Bugs Me!I think you're jumping the gun just a tad bit on the whole 'outstripping human intelligence" bit. From what info I've got on the subject any prediction that'll happen any time soon is actually astronomically low. Of course, this also leads into a massively off topic discussion about what is intelligence.
While "humans will become obsolete" is obviously something that we're currently nowhere near approaching, I think it's just an inescapable fact that increased productivity due to computer-assisted humans means you can have less people doing the same job. It doesn't even have to be anything world-changing. For example, maybe a slightly smarter search algorithm makes legal research simpler, and that puts a whole lot of paralegals out of work. What was formerly professional, skilled labor becomes entirely unnecessary.
You could probably come up with more "work" for them to do, but at a certain point you'd inevitably have people be figuratively digging pointless ditches and then filling them. And you'd have to ask why capitalism is structurally incapable of allowing for increased productivity to translate into increased leisure time.
edited 15th Jun '16 3:08:17 AM by Clarste
A journalist visits a Trump rally and live-tweets the experience.
since there is no way I'm going to watch that... how close was it to this?
also, from a few pages back, I wrote Know Your Meme off during the whole Quinn thing, WHICH WE ARE NOT GOING TO GET INTO HERE!
advancing the front into TV TropesIf machines free up enough leisure time, people should be able to retrain to do jobs they can actually be good at, or invent new jobs entirely.
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.Regardless, such a society will have to redefine its internal concepts of what "work" is and what it means to be a successful person. To move into post-scarcity without doing so invites social catastrophe.
Heck, it's only been a scant three centuries since the Industrial Revolution forced a massive redefinition of human purpose from community-seeking beings to money-seeking beings. We weren't always capitalists.
edited 15th Jun '16 5:32:52 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"You can watch the Greenboro Trump rally here.
There are a great number of things that are objectionable from the entire speech. Donald Trump is the epitome of excessive. He lacks any sense of moderation, holds no virtue nor encourages it in others and shows a remarkable lack of coherence. The only thing I can go by for his proposals would be his campaign website, but everything about his personality and character tells me he cannot be trusted to even follow through his own policy programme.
There is also a problem with almost every claim he makes. He does not show where he gets his statistics, provides no evidence and is essentially the King of Generalizations and Simplistic Statements. There were claims he made which I don't know if they are true or not (nor can I know given that I am not American nor do I live in the US), but they sound either like half-truths, manipulations, outright lies or misinformation. There were some elements which rang true, but his boisterous nature and arrogant demeanour force me to think the worst of him even when he may say something that is agreeable.
He also has a tendency to veer off-topic to the point where he mixes subjects and criticisms without a sound common thread to tie them together. Take his statement about Bill and Hillary Clinton "owing money" to states "which kill gays" referring to the "gulf states" specifically. Where does such a claim come from? He then claims that the US has "no money" because "it owes 19 trillions US dollars" which will soon become "21 trillion dollars". Following this he says that the US has no money to "pay for bringing people that we don't know" and for an infrastructure which is "going to hell", the US "is going to hell" and apparently the US military is in such "trouble", the military is "depleted" (of what? Be specific!) and the military planes are so old they need new parts and apparently they are replaced with parts from "plane graveyards and museums". These are quite a number of claims he's making and, while I understand the need to keep messages short and to the point when making a speech and during a campaign, there is a difference between sending a to-the-point message for the purpose of uniting, bringing supporters together and making very broad questionable claims where you're almost directly accusing your opponents of illegality.
He also seems to cut himself mid-sentence quite a number of times. As if the original trail of thought were not important any longer and quickly changes to another unrelated sentence.
I don't mean to offend anyone here who may support Trump, but he simply does not have the character required for someone who wishes to represent the American sovereign body. A system of representation is one where you must have a great degree of trust from the electors to the elected. Even if you try to justify his character by the need of having someone who is "pragmatic" or who can "tell it as it is" (here "as it is" is in itself VERY questionable given his claims), few of his mannerisms and none of his behaviour shows me that he even knows what being realistic or pragmatic means, especially when having to negotiate and/or bargain with other representatives. The impression I have is that he sees the US state in the same way as his businesses, believing that he can deal with both in the same way. There may be aspects and experiences from the private sector that can help or aid a representative, but one should never confuse the private and the public.
His arrogance is also a serious problem. He seems to think that his company is the greatest company that has ever existed. A little humility in my opinion goes a long way. Trump also mentions that Hillary at some point mentioned how she does not "like Trump's tone while reading it off a teleprompter". Right after he declares how "amazing" the company he built is.
What am I supposed to think? I do feel sorry for supporters of Trump. They do not deserve to have such a terrible candidate.
edited 15th Jun '16 5:56:43 AM by germi91
"It is true that we are called a democracy, for the administration is in the hands of the many and not of the few."A Texas school stood by while a black girl got "play-"lynched.
![]()
Congratulations, you win one hundred Govvies. It's a meaningless award I made up to celebrate people who understand how government works.
If only it were possible for our own media to so straightforwardly analyze Trump.
edited 15th Jun '16 5:38:35 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

If Automation keeps rising, not many jobs will remain.