ZombieMantis

🫡 thank you for posting the source

ඞ ⬅️ 🆎🅾️🆖 🆙

Business casual

Heartening news. I look forward to Proton's future.

How do you have .144 of an update?

I'm familiar with that premise, a bit like the paperclip machine. I'm not sure it would need a specific goal hard-coded into it. We don't, and we're conscious. Maybe that would depend on the nature of its origin, whether it would be given some command or purpose.

Maybe it could be reasoned into allowing itself to be shut down (or terminated) to achieve its goal.

Maybe it could decide that it doesn't care about the original directives it was handed. What if the machine doesn't want to make paperclips anymore?

There's also the question of whether a digital computer software program, I assume invented by humans to fulfill some task, would even have the instinct of self-preservation. We have that instinct as a result of evolution, because you're more useful to the species (and to your genes) alive than dead. Would such a program have this innate instinct against termination? Perhaps it could decide it wants to continue existing as a conscious decision, but if that's the case it'd be just as able to decide it's time to self-terminate to achieve its goals. Assuming it even has set goals. Assuming that it would have the same instincts, intuitions, and basal desires humans have might be presumptive on our part.

The checks and balances you're describing do exist, unfortunately Congress is (and has been for quite some time now) dysfunctional. A simple majority in both chambers and the President's signature is enough to undo many SCOTUS rulings by passing a new law. They can also pass amendments to the constitution, which used to happen with some regularity, but we haven't passed one since Clinton was in office.

If you want Congress to act as a check on the court, then you need Congress to be functional.

By defragging the zebra, duh

Why'd Bavaria sink? The map shows they voted CDU? Or was that a separate retribution?