> Groups of people don't have guilt or automatic responsibility, only individuals do.
Companies and governments can be found guilty of wrong doing.
ChatGPT:
Yes, both companies and governments can be found guilty of wrongdoing. The extent and process of holding them accountable can vary depending on the jurisdiction and the specific circumstances involved. Companies can face legal consequences for actions such as fraud, environmental violations, or antitrust violations, among others. Similarly, governments can be held accountable through legal means, such as investigations, impeachment, or legal proceedings, for acts that are deemed illegal or in violation of their responsibilities. The nature of the wrongdoing and the applicable laws and regulations determine the process and consequences of holding them accountable.
Edit: Havard was ruled against as an organization. Of course organizations can be held responsible for what they do including the government.
I took the transporter, silicon, and freeze. The soul comes from the brain/mind. I don’t accept the premise of the third question. It is not a reduction to see that the brain/mind produces the soul. And I use the term soul because if one does not then their morality is questioned so that is an easy fix to make.
Yeah, I have never read a definition of "soul" that made sense to me. The premise for Question 3 said that it has some small effect on character, smaller than upbringing and genes. But lots of people have character or genes like me. So are souls unique? If not memories, what information _is_ stored in the soul?
Is crypto a briar patch that will fail or is it an ingenious technology that will kill traditional banking? Only time will tell. More competition is a good thing. Right?
I haven't been following crypto space in that detail, but my understanding is that what crypto is/does boils down to in traditional banking terms is payment settlement and (leveraged) trading/gambling. Unfortunately for crypto, these are a tiny, tiny fraction of traditional banking. How is crypto going to kill traditional mortgages, M&A, corporate bond market, car loans etc?
Mostly I was outlining two possible extremes but there is some reality behind them.
Coinbase was planning on creating a lending product but the SEC called that a security and Coinbase has delayed its plans.
There are collateralized loan products already in decentralized finance apps such as Curve and MakerDAO (oasis.app). There aren't many artificial limits to what a Turing complete smart contract can do as long as it has access to the underlying information.
Time has already told: it won't. Bitcoin isn't even a competitor to most of what banks do. At best it's a competitor to PayPal, and even there it is doing at terrible job.
My guess is that Havana Syndrome is a lot like Lyme disease. At first people thought it was just people complaining but then it became supported by science.
Yeah but there’s actually a tick bite involved with Lyme. We know about other tick borne diseases. Its a solid start point for medical research to begin with…
where as with Havana Syndrome we have to speculate about the mechanism of action, and introduction, and basically everything since there was nothing physical to go on beyond the patient’s physical symptoms, we have someone going “agh my brain”, and have to hunt around for answers.
And with this Fentanyl thing we’ve just got people strait up reacting wrong to a substance, full on placebo effect “high from smoking turf grass” type of reactions, except instead of a relatively harmless thing like a weed high we have significantly negative reactions displayed by the Law Enforcement Officers, so I suppose it’s technically the nocebo effect, and given the level of information we have about the substance, and the statistical sample of LEO that are presenting with the reactions, either becoming a cop somehow makes you allergic to fentanyl, or it’s in their damn heads …
and the problem is how to A: get this through to them, and B: prevent them using their social influence to spread this psychosomatic to the wider community. There’s a lot of evidence for how modern society has made us more vulnerable to social contagion like this, we’ve got media exposure priming us with the truth of how bad the world can be and how little we understand of some of it, we have social media spreading things based on engagement metrics that strongly correlate with our base instincts like fear of threats (real or perceived), and police have a significant influence in society due to their implicit position of trust with many governments deferring to police force’s advice on matters of crime and social issues (the appropriateness of this approach is extremely variable so this isn’t the place to discuss it at length, sometimes it’s good, sometimes the cops strait up abuse/manipulate this and politicians won’t fight it due to the pressure to avoid things like being labeled weak on crime)
So yeah maybe we get some funding and do some double blind trials recorded fully on video and show it to the cops as part of training. “You see this chalk powder, we’ve replaced it with fentanyl, let’s see if the cop can tell” … and then we show the counter example “we replaced this fentanyl with chalk powder, let’s see if the cop can tell”… I don’t think it will take long for them to stop wanting to look stupid.
It’s easy enough to explain away behaviour of officers in the field with things like “you can never know and have to treat everything as a real threat” and “we can’t show you all the other incidents where it really happened because that’s evidence part of an ongoing investigation that would be compromised by showing you it”. But I’m not sure how long this would hold up if you’re in a climate controlled lab where we can reassure them we’re doing this for science and to better protect them from the dangers of fentanyl. It’s important to not lie about the motivations but clever wording like this is pretty standard for this kind of experiment when it’s done, lying to the participants undermines your moral high ground when sharing the results with the community the participants are from (in this case LEOs)
ARPANET started in the late 1960s. The internet was mostly crystallized as early as 1982 when TCP/IP was standardized[1]. AOL became common place in the late 1990s.
The Bitcoin network started in 2009. Ethereum, which allows multiple decentralized applications to run on a single chain, started in 2015. The Bitcoin Lightning Network which scales Bitcoin transactions with state channels started in 2019.
Uniswap and MakerDAO are pretty impressive use cases. Ethereum is becoming more efficient as rollups[2] are developed and released which will lead to use cases that we can’t predict yet.
Whenever you have an idea put it in a file or notebook vault. Prioritize them by putting the most interesting ideas at the top. Build and update the list of ideas for life and you will never have to start from zero when coming up with ideas.
The changes people are afraid of are Musk bringing back Trump and Alex Jones to the platform. Making Twitter more like 4chan and Bitchute in the name of free speech absolutism will turn it into a fringe place that drives people away.
Also, Twitter isn't a place for regular users. Other platforms go out of their way to make content go viral. The only content that goes viral on Twitter are posts from accounts that are already popular. Musk sees more value in Twitter than the average user because it's his microphone to his bootlickers.
That much won't change. In fact it will be extended to people who demonstratably don't deserve to have a soap box.
Companies and governments can be found guilty of wrong doing.
ChatGPT:
Yes, both companies and governments can be found guilty of wrongdoing. The extent and process of holding them accountable can vary depending on the jurisdiction and the specific circumstances involved. Companies can face legal consequences for actions such as fraud, environmental violations, or antitrust violations, among others. Similarly, governments can be held accountable through legal means, such as investigations, impeachment, or legal proceedings, for acts that are deemed illegal or in violation of their responsibilities. The nature of the wrongdoing and the applicable laws and regulations determine the process and consequences of holding them accountable.
Edit: Havard was ruled against as an organization. Of course organizations can be held responsible for what they do including the government.