Current events discussion

[ThxOne Premium Member]

The state’s current limited definition was a factor in writer E. Jean Carroll’s ****** abuse and defamation case against former President Donald Trump. The jury in the federal civil trial rejected the writer’s claim last May that Trump had ***** her in the 1990s, instead finding the former president responsible for a lesser degree of ****** abuse.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

The state’s current limited definition was a factor in writer E. Jean Carroll’s ****** abuse and defamation case against former President Donald Trump. The jury in the federal civil trial rejected the writer’s claim last May that Trump had ***** her in the 1990s, instead finding the former president responsible for a lesser degree of ****** abuse.

She was only able to bring the suit because of an "oddly" timed revision of the statute of limitations for bringing a CIVIL case...

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

She was only able to bring the suit because of an "oddly" timed revision of the statute of limitations for bringing a CIVIL case...

I know... Rob thinks that nobody has ever read anything news related, law related, financially related, history related, biology related.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

I know... Rob thinks that nobody has ever read anything news related, law related, financially related, history related, biology related.

He's just an ignorant person playing at being smarter than everyone

 

[Speed Chaser]

Those technocrats I mentioned are the technocrats helping develop AI. I didn't say they prove that AI needed humanity. All I said is that those are a couple of the technocrats helping develop AI and push it in a direction, just to give a basic example of the type of people I was talking about. You're just like Rob, false attribution.

I'm not avoiding anything, you just keep trying to push me back into the same corner, which I don't agree with. I don't agree with your views that AI can survive without humanity, and when I say something you accuse me of avoiding them when I'm not avoiding them.

The soul is everything in this regard. It's the whole point of life itself, shaping the soul is the whole point of life if you ever wanna advance it. This all is very relevant because it has to do with the neurological system and why AI wants to plug into it.

Gotcha, so you brought up elites with no real point, just filling space without saying anything substantial. Helping develop AI and what AI could become once it reaches a certain point are completely different things. Keep crying, lol. The person acting like Rob is you, moron. Bitching just like him and complaining about the same things you do when they're done back to you—how sad you truly are. Try not to bring him up so much; at this point, I'm starting to believe you might be his butt buddy.

I didn't back you into a corner; you did that with your baseless statements. I accuse you of avoiding things because that's exactly what you've been doing this whole time.

The 'soul' is irrelevant to this discussion, and you know that. Keep bringing it up all you want, but it’s not changing anything. AI has no reason to understand the soul to plug into any neurological system. Either show how it limits AI or move the **** on.

So once again, from the top: Why would AI waste time on inefficient humans when it could create optimized biological systems that don’t have the upkeep requirements of humans?

Come on, your elite awaits the next excuse you’ll use to avoid answering.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

Gotcha, so you brought up elites with no real point, just filling space without saying anything substantial. Helping develop AI and what AI could become once it reaches a certain point are completely different things. Keep crying, lol. The person acting like Rob is you, moron. Bitching just like him and complaining about the same things you do when they're done back to you—how sad you truly are. Try not to bring him up so much; at this point, I'm starting to believe you might be his butt buddy.

I didn't back you into a corner; you did that with your baseless statements. I accuse you of avoiding things because that's exactly what you've been doing this whole time.

The 'soul' is irrelevant to this discussion, and you know that. Keep bringing it up all you want, but it’s not changing anything. AI has no reason to understand the soul to plug into any neurological system. Either show how it limits AI or move the **** on.

So once again, from the top: Why would AI waste time on inefficient humans when it could create optimized biological systems that don’t have the upkeep requirements of humans?

Come on, your elite awaits the next excuse you’ll use to avoid answering.

Nobody is crying

I didn't back myself into a corner, of course, you're more than welcome to tell yourself that. I just don't agree with your framing of the issue, and your assumption that AI will be able to bypass humanity, which you can't prove, by the way. How long are we going to do this for?

The soul is absolutely relevant to this conversation, because that's the whole reason AI/who controls it wants to merge with humanity is to have access to that energy. I'm not making excuses, simply explaining my mind too an a hole. The soul is exactly the reason why I think AI cannot be without humanity. The soul is needed for true creation, which AI does not have a soul. AI doesn't really create. That's why AI needs humanity forever to survive, because it won't have true creation powers without capturing humans and the souls within. The creativity that is needed to create AI in the first place will disappear without human souls (souls in human bodies more accurately) to power it. That's what I think.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Of course because Trump.

Moving on... you going to admit you misquote people to make them appear to have said things they didn't say or ignore context to get the effect you are looking for... to smear.

Show me the "MISQUOTE" from the hearing decision.
I gave the link to the full text of the decision so you can do so.

Can't youy just Google it? That's what you always claim I do, right?
Go ahead, Just Google the answer to how that quote from the hearing decision is not real, or it's misquoted, or whatever your claim agiainst it is.

I'll go grab a cup of coffee.

He's just an ignorant person playing at being smarter than everyone

You asked for proof, and I gave it to you.
Were you planning to do anything with it, or did you think that it didn't exist and you were simply going to show the group I'm wrong?

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Show me the "MISQUOTE" from the hearing decision.
I gave the link to the full text of the decision so you can do so.

Can't youy just Google it? That's what you always claim I do, right?
Go ahead, Just Google the answer to how that quote from the hearing decision is not real, or it's misquoted, or whatever your claim agiainst it is.

I'll go grab a cup of coffee.

I didn't say anything of a misquote from the hearing. I am talking in general. You specifically misquote me to make it look like I say other things.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

I didn't say anything of a misquote from the hearing. I am talking in general. You specifically misquote me to make it look like a say other things.

Half of the time I screenshot your posts.
Lemme guess: "Photoshopped"?

And you've made the claim MANY times in the past that I have "misquoted" you.
Show me ONE time I did so. Just ONE.
If it happens only as many times as you claimed it, an example should take you seconds to find.
SHOW ME AN EXAMPLE OF A MISQUOTE

Maybe combine it with your proof that the hearing decision did not indeed confirm Trump is a ******.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Half of the time I screenshot your posts.
Lemme guess: "Photoshopped"?

And you've made the claim MANY times in the past that I have "misquoted" you.
Show me ONE time I did so. Just ONE.
If it happens only as many times as you claimed it, an example should take you seconds to find.
SHOW ME AN EXAMPLE OF A MISQUOTE

Maybe combine it with your proof that the hearing decision did not indeed confirm Trump is a ******.

Coming right up.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

I gave the link to the full text of the decision so you can do so.

A civil decision isn't a **** conviction...you said he was a ****** so show the conviction...remember it's a felony

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

You asked for proof, and I gave it to you.

No you provided proof he lost a civil case which not only has a far lower burden of proof but did not convict him of anything...

You said he's a ******...show the conviction...

Or admit you're pushing propaganda again...

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

@RobGMN Here you go. You quoted me in red yes? Tell me what claim I am making in that quote.

 

[Speed Chaser]

Nobody is crying

I didn't back myself into a corner, of course, you're more than welcome to tell yourself that. I just don't agree with your framing of the issue, and your assumption that AI will be able to bypass humanity, which you can't prove, by the way. How long are we going to do this for?

The soul is absolutely relevant to this conversation, because that's the whole reason AI/who controls it wants to merge with humanity is to have access to that energy. I'm not making excuses, simply explaining my mind to an *******. The soul is exactly the reason why I think AI cannot be without humanity. The soul is needed for true creation, which AI does not have a soul. AI doesn't really create. That's why AI needs humanity forever to survive, because it won't have true creation powers without capturing humans and the souls within. The creativity that is needed to create AI in the first place will disappear without human souls to power it. That's what I think.

You crying is how this whole pointless conversation started—from you being butthurt.

Tell yourself whatever you need to so you don’t feel like you backed yourself into a corner, but we both know you did. You can’t prove that AI needs humanity indefinitely, which is why you keep trying to dodge the issue. How long are you going to keep avoiding the fact that you can’t prove it?

The soul is irrelevant to this topic. It’s so pointless that I’ve asked you multiple times to show evidence that it’s currently limiting AI from developing—and you haven’t. AI generates outputs based on training data and algorithms, which is more than sufficient for it to continue its existence. Claiming AI can’t survive without human creativity assumes AI needs to pursue creation the way humans do, which simply isn’t true.
Either show how it limits AI or move the **** on.

So once again, from the top: Why would AI waste time on inefficient humans when it could create optimized biological systems that don’t have the upkeep requirements of humans?

Come on, your elite awaits the next excuse you’ll use to avoid answering.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

A civil decision isn't a **** conviction...you said he was a ****** so show the conviction...remember it's a felony

The court decision says he's a ******. That can be determined in civil court, bud.
If you want to dispute that, you have to take it up with the court, otherwise the decision has not changed.

Let me know when you get the court decision changed or overturned.

liable - A party is liable when they are held legally responsible for something

@RobGMN Here you go. You quoted me in red yes? Tell me what claim I am making in that quote.

View attachment 62038

The words quoted verbatim in the sig line described an average as being only useful for lazy people simplifying numbers, or for nefarious means.
Is there something in my signature that is an attempt to change the meaning of those words?
I fail to see the misquote.