I’ll do you one better by just using logic. There is no more work needed for blinding lasers, you can pick up a battery powered IR setup for a few hundred dollars and strap it to a rifle, done. Recomb DNA actually is still being studied, allow me to gesture very broadly to ALL the shit we do with yeast and I dated a girl working with M. Maydis for treating breast cancer.
I think you’re confused, because not only am I agreeing with you, but none of the things I said should be confusing to anyone with a > 10th grade education.
ZDL is confused. Human cloning? Easy, done. Not used, but well understood. You explained the lasers. Recombinant DNA? That is the basis of all current biotech outside of mRNA and CRISPR (which is also recombinant DNA, just very focused).
You’re not. The problem isn’t just that they’re not supplying proof. It’s that they’re making assertions without supplying proof.
It is the pairing that is toxic.
The person to whom I responded said this flatly:
None are paused tho.
That is a bold, positive claim made with a very certain voice. And precisely because there is no way to verify this, it is impossible to prove or disprove. Which places it fully in the realm of unsupported speculation.
Had there been some form of tempering, clearly identifying it as opinion or speculation, then I’d have no problem with it.
LOL, they probably haven’t paused any of it, though. I mean like they’d tell us if they were!
Allegedly, a Dr in China was already creating designer babies, and recombinant DNA products exist (and therefore, the research to create those products is being done.) Hell, I’ve done my own recombinant DNA experiments in my bio labs during college.
The kind of “AI” involved here (LLMbeciles and other such degenerative AI forms) are difficult to do in secret given, you know, the massive server racks with an extreme thirst for power and water they involve…
was not the original claim that they were paused? why is it always the claim that you disagree with that has the burden of proof, not the original claim?
And the beauty of this stance is that it’s literally impossible to disprove, so you never have to be wrong.
Of course the problem is that you as the claimant have burden of proof.
I’ll do you one better by just using logic. There is no more work needed for blinding lasers, you can pick up a battery powered IR setup for a few hundred dollars and strap it to a rifle, done. Recomb DNA actually is still being studied, allow me to gesture very broadly to ALL the shit we do with yeast and I dated a girl working with M. Maydis for treating breast cancer.
Translation from bafflegab to English: “I have no evidence and thus cannot cite it.”
I think you’re confused, because not only am I agreeing with you, but none of the things I said should be confusing to anyone with a > 10th grade education.
ZDL is confused. Human cloning? Easy, done. Not used, but well understood. You explained the lasers. Recombinant DNA? That is the basis of all current biotech outside of mRNA and CRISPR (which is also recombinant DNA, just very focused).
I dunno what you’re trying to argue. They accused me of using needlessly confusing language, that was what I was referring to.
I think you’re confused, SomethingSnappy is agreeing with you.
Now I feel dumb.
They just used normal words tho? This comment seems to be telling on yourself more than anything.
People who say this kind of thing about claims regarding government or industry-level activities have no clue about security classifications.
How are you supposed to provide proof for something that is being deliberately withheld from the public?
You’re not. The problem isn’t just that they’re not supplying proof. It’s that they’re making assertions without supplying proof.
It is the pairing that is toxic.
The person to whom I responded said this flatly:
That is a bold, positive claim made with a very certain voice. And precisely because there is no way to verify this, it is impossible to prove or disprove. Which places it fully in the realm of unsupported speculation.
Had there been some form of tempering, clearly identifying it as opinion or speculation, then I’d have no problem with it.
There’s an example. See the difference?
If AI can only be done in such secrecy that it’s impossible to disprove then I’d call that a win.
Yeah literally just let us have some peace and quiet before we’re suddenly turned into paper clips
Best incremental game btw
I’ve got a blinding laser in my CD burner.
Allegedly, a Dr in China was already creating designer babies, and recombinant DNA products exist (and therefore, the research to create those products is being done.) Hell, I’ve done my own recombinant DNA experiments in my bio labs during college.
I’m not a particular fan of AI but I’m not naive enough to believe that research would stop just because everyone claimed it had.
The kind of “AI” involved here (LLMbeciles and other such degenerative AI forms) are difficult to do in secret given, you know, the massive server racks with an extreme thirst for power and water they involve…
The world is full of data centres who’s to say what their purpose is. How are you going to verify other nations compliance.
There is no scenario in which this genie is getting put back in the bottle
There is no answering the conspiracy mindset.
By which I mean the American one.
was not the original claim that they were paused? why is it always the claim that you disagree with that has the burden of proof, not the original claim?
The files basically confessed