sircac

I demand the lack of allegiance to a corrupt state, is a kidnapped entity that does not represent anymore the colectivity, it must be topped, but how would that correction be enforced if not by other collectively organised entities, even if ephemeral?

I believe a state can dynamically represent the common will of the society given the correct tools and vigilance.

Spontaneous will can easily fall apart by a few organised with a lot of resources, more easily than a centralised entity arisen form the colectivity of the many. Call that state or whatever, but collective coherence is fragile without some centered governance of the collective resources, which must be continuously watched by those generating it, because those few predators will continuously try to control it.

I fear that generalising that any state-like organisation must disappear will only make the things easier for those few with a lot of resources. I hope our differences here are only semantic, but those slogans seem to easily confound one thing with another…

By their direct attempts in interfering in the state or manipulating its supporters (voters in a democracy), good luck protecting from them without an organised society, call that collective force/entity “state” or whatever you want…

I would strongly advise to not confuse the “state” with the “resulting de facto inferences of the richest and most powerful few” in a “coordinated effort of a collective society to protect us from those few” with the later, because those few also want to destroy it for their own benefit… a “state” made up of all the society is the only coordinated thing protecting us from those few human predators

A home server with digital services (from mail to cloud) as we got wired phones back in our timeline, most of the time up, possible terminal of our own and able to unplug at will

Thanks for the insight! Still I have problems to identify “inteligence” in brutte force approaches, otherwise looks like a linear regression algorithm would lie also under the category of AI, and the original idea of AI, which the Wikipedia acknowledges included “reasoning” capabilities, I feel has not been yet incorporated/disentangled in current predictive algorithms. Whether it rises from things like that, I think we are not there yet and all seems to me not different from a linear regression algorithm, which I do not feel “intelligent” enough to place under AI. But I think everything is too vage also and there is a lot of overselling (including Deep Blue’s “inteligence”).

IMHO that broad conception is part of the abuse of the concept up to the point that another adjective (general, 🤷🏼‍♂️) must be added to recover its original intention… I have problems to recognise “inteligence” in a boosted decision tree… machine learning techniques looks to me much more appropriate as a concept

We call it AI but they are just pattern predictor tools in massive dimensions, one day a real AI will appear and will be ridiculous call these things from the AI era…

The “True Facts About Microsoft” and Zefrank reference got me :D

A light-speed “denaturalization” of the universe should not worry anyone, cannot be a faster cease of existence… indeed it could be taking place on each frame of existence, like in an old ctr screen…

Ma cuanto mi manca Italia…

…and looping on the same phrase 3 times and still not being able to realise of what you just read

Good bot!