EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 4274
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 14 2016 06:33 Simberto wrote: I gotta say, whoever found out that you can just do nothing at all when you are not the ruling party, and that the US system allows you to just block everything, is a major dick. "Yeah, we are just gonna wait for the next president to nominate someone for the supreme court". That is just son incredibly insane and weird, and i can't see why people simply accept it. The US voting population has been living through almost 20 years of deeply partisan goverment. 4 years of congress simply saying they would do nothing if Obama suggested it. The apathy about goverment is the highest I have ever seen it. | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
On July 14 2016 06:33 Simberto wrote: I gotta say, whoever found out that you can just do nothing at all when you are not the ruling party, and that the US system allows you to just block everything, is a major dick. "Yeah, we are just gonna wait for the next president to nominate someone for the supreme court". That is just son incredibly insane and weird, and i can't see why people simply accept it. When you've found that out you know they're just 1 step away from just figuring out they can also wait until a republican president is elected to nominate a "republican-leaning" justice, if not a straight up republican justice. What's to prevent them from obstructing with impunity*? At that point it's the SCOTUS itself that would have to step up and say that the nomination process was written that way as a checks and balances thing and not as a "checkmate" thing for the Senate to just undermine the flow of the judicial system for political reasons. Or anyway I don't know how that hypothetical jam would be solved but it's clear that the Senate is overstepping. *: I don't expect that a Senate with a republican majority would prevent a newly elected president, even a democrat, from nominating a competent justice, but what the fuck do I know. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
| ||
|
thePunGun
598 Posts
On July 14 2016 06:45 Plansix wrote: The US voting population has been living through almost 20 years of deeply partisan goverment. 4 years of congress simply saying they would do nothing if Obama suggested it. The apathy about goverment is the highest I have ever seen it. Well, democracy is a flawed system and even ancient greek thinkers like Sokrates and Plato despised it. + Show Spoiler + Socrates insisted that democracy is inherently corrupt, as it gives in to the will of the people, which is inherently depraved. Democratic people have little tolerance for argument: Mob rule sustains their political way of life. Those who disagree will be killed. The many, Socrates explained, are unfit for rule. Humans are naturally shallow, superficial, and ignorant—given the chance, these qualities will manifest themselves as injustice. Only a select, educated few will ever be capable of effective leadership. Plato, a follower and transcriber of Socrates, agreed. In The Republic, Plato categorized different Greek governments in a hierarchical, devolutionary manner: An oligarchy leads to a democracy, which leads to tyranny. Plato stressed this idea, repeating it often: Democracy leads directly to tyranny. SourceMy vision of a perfect future is an AI ruling over humanity, because we are unfit to rule! I know that sounds harsh, but the truth always hurts(well, maybe not always and it may not even be 100% truthful....just my humble opinion) | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
 | ||
|
thePunGun
598 Posts
| ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
On July 14 2016 07:22 farvacola wrote: Any AI created by a human would never be able to rid itself of the flaw that makes humanity unfit to rule itself that's not true  | ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
On July 14 2016 07:30 thePunGun wrote: Considering it would learn on it's own, faster than any human ever could... I think it might be our only hope to survive as a species. we've got several things that could wipe us out as a species before any of that: In most likely to least Nuclear catastrophe via terrorism Artifical intelligence that eliminates humanity Climate change/disastrous climate event | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
Sure it is, and while you'd have to try elsewhere due to this being off-topic, I'm certain that you can't prove otherwise | ||
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
There seems to be a strong racial bias in capital punishment and a moderate racial bias in sentence length and decision to jail. There is ambiguity over the level of racial bias, depending on whose studies you want to believe and how strictly you define “racial bias”, in police stops, police shootings in certain jurisdictions, and arrests for minor drug offenses. There seems to be little or no racial bias in arrests for serious violent crime, police shootings in most jurisdictions, prosecutions, or convictions. ![[image loading]](http://slatestarcodex.com/blog_images/shootinggraph.jpg) | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
| ||
|
Godwrath
Spain10163 Posts
| ||
|
Cowboy24
94 Posts
On July 14 2016 01:58 Plansix wrote: Late to the party. If congress and the GOP wants to push forward with charges, they have the power to do so. The fact that they didn't is telling. Ken Star was ready to go the instant the investigation was over. They appointed him during White Water because they knew Janet Reno shouldn't have heard the case and she agreed. But the GOP never wanted to be the ones at the head of this, they just wanted to give it to people under the control of the executive branch. They never wanted to push to bring charges themselves, just blame those who decided not to based on lack of evidence. That is why the house republicans are a bunch of spineless whiners. Because they have the power to do things, but don't want to be responsible for them. I agree with everything here, except for the lack of evidence part. There is plenty of evidence. Just no will-power on the part of the Republicans. Of course, we know the Dems in the Senate wouldn't convict anyway, so it's a bit of a moot point. On July 14 2016 02:00 Lord Tolkien wrote: ...Nixon couldn't make that defense because he told his aides, explicitly on official White House recordings, to cover it up. As for the rest of your post. This thread isn't r/conspiracy, and I would like to think the conversation is several grades above r/politics. Please post such idle musings there instead. Corruption in the government, nepotism, and the K-Street/Media/Government revolving-door are pretty mainstream topics, and I actually don't know anyone who would deny they exist, or suggest they aren't proper topics of discussion. Well, I guess I didn't know anyone... | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On July 14 2016 07:22 farvacola wrote: Any AI created by a human would never be able to rid itself of the flaw that makes humanity unfit to rule itself so an alien AI | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 14 2016 07:53 Cowboy24 wrote: I agree with everything here, except for the lack of evidence part. There is plenty of evidence. Just no will-power on the part of the Republicans. Of course, we know the Dems in the Senate wouldn't convict anyway, so it's a bit of a moot point. Corruption in the government, nepotism, and the K-Street/Media/Government revolving-door are pretty mainstream topics, and I actually don't know anyone who would deny they exist, or suggest they aren't proper topics of discussion. Well, I guess I didn't know anyone... The FBI felt differently. If the GOP wanted findings by someone that wasn't from the executive branch, they should have done it. Personally, I take the FBI on good faith that they know when to charge someone and when it is a wast of time. | ||
|
zulu_nation8
China26351 Posts
But when it mattered — pull the trigger or not — the police officers tuned out race. They shot at about 13 percent of the unarmed black men and roughly the same number of the unarmed white men. By contrast, the civilians shot at about 35 percent of the unarmed black men and 29 percent of unarmed white men. To check the results, the researchers ran the entire trial again, and speeded the rate that the images flashed by. The results were the same. Compared to the public at large, the authors concluded, police officers had a “less trigger-happy orientation.” Ms. Keesee, a commander, has patrolled all over Denver, and said that in some areas suspicions of police racism ran high. “Whenever there’s a shooting of a black suspect by a white officer,” she said, “it has a significant effect on the community, and the elephant in the room, the big question, is, Do you train your officers to shoot black males? This affirms that we’re on the right track.” | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
Potentially, though the term "alien AI" may not even do the thing justice, I guess we'll have to see | ||
|
mahrgell
Germany3943 Posts
Then they would now have to train their officers to shoot more whites, just to even out the statistics. Goal for the next month: shoot 2 whites randomly, we are lacking behind in white killings. Luckily they don't need to do that. Puh! They are killing everyone equally, everything is fine, move on. And stop those damn protests! | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 14 2016 08:49 mahrgell wrote: Imagine they would have found out, that they were shooting blacks relatively more often.... Then they would now have to train their officers to shoot more whites, just to even out the statistics. Goal for the next month: shoot 2 whites randomly, we are lacking behind in white killings. Luckily they don't need to do that. Puh! They are killing everyone equally, everything is fine, move on. And stop those damn protests! In this controlled study under less stress than in the field, we only kill unarmed people around 13% of the time. Everything is fine. Except that we kill unarmed people more than 1/10 times. And this does nothing to address existing racial bias in all other forms of police work. As much as I love these studies, until we get the legit data on police use of lethal force nation wide, its all speculation based on models and simulations. | ||
| ||
