nigel99

You mean idiot proof solutions get trumped?

You’ve got to think like a sales or management person. Filtering, linear regression, or bit of averaging no problem slap an AI label on it!

We are probably well down that road already in technology. In CAD and Software many engineers already don’t know the fundamentals without the tools. A real danger as a few have mentioned already is part of the laziness is blindly trusting the output.

You mean like my senior management uses ‘Management Consultants’ without understanding the limitations and what the technical details are . My stocktake gripe from earlier, management response was “we will employ someone in Poland because Australia is too expensive”. Product is manufactured and consumed in Australia:( But management consultants said to consolidate low cost labour in Poland

So as not to derail the Harris thread, brought the discussion on AI here as I found it interesting. First off I think like most buzzwords I think it gets misused a lot. Pictures are no longer “photoshopped”, now every doctored image is ‘AI’ as an example. I’ll admit I know very little about what goes on under the hood. I’ve had some experience with machine learning where algorithms find patterns in data correlations that we tend to miss. I know nowadays that’s called AI - although I’m not sure I agree completely with that. I learned something interesting in the other thread about the data sources used by the big AI engines. I had assumed incorrectly that only ‘quality’ data was used. As was pointed it out it’s interesting that it draws on forums, social media and basically everything on the public net. I’m not sure if they have weightings on the data sources or not or if it’s simply volume based statistically. I use Chatgbt quite a lot for work and study, and it’s a productivity booster. Upload log files and get a quick plain English description, generate small python or bash scripts for work. It definitely makes mistakes, but generally saves a lot of time. Or stock takes, which are the bane of my boss and my life, due to shitty company structure they have us managing stock for our product line. Explained to senior management that having a guy with a PhD in mechanical engineering, and me with a Masters in Communications was expensive and could be done by a high school student fell on deaf ears. Chatgbt has been great, take a photo of the shelf and get counts back in 30 seconds. Doing a psych degree involves a huge amount of reading and filtering through lots of garbage that gets published, so being able to source papers (not using AI), but then getting the synopsis and sections saves literally hours of reading. You’ve still got to actually read the papers, that you shortlisted, so it’s not doing the ‘thinking’ and critical analysis. If it’s purely volume based, it’s obviously vulnerable to the old google front page SEI manipulation techniques.

Well I’d take Harris over AI, but would take AI over Trump!

Absolutely, and that was a 30 second prompt (one of the dangers of AI), however if you asked for a detailed analysis of say economic policy risks and benefits you’d get more focused information. It makes mistakes, but much like the old AAD discussions I suspect it’s a bit more reliable than us. On the bright side, it seems most AI is biased towards the Praise for Harris than critics corner threads :)

You don’t think the models draw information in a weighted manner from mostly reliable sources and then aggregate it? I hope and doubt that sources like reddit, truth social and dz.com carry much weight. Whereas we might look for news articles, papers or results that confirm our biases, I would expect AI to not have an inherent bias. It’s not going to be perfect but it should be able to assimilate a lot more information than we can.

It’s an interesting question. I saw something (might have been satire/spoof) that Alexa did something similar. In principle AI should be fact based and objective meaning that it should be a reliable indicator. I just asked chatgbt for the pros and cons of each: When considering the pros and cons of voting for either Kamala Harris or Donald Trump, the analysis often revolves around their policy positions, leadership style, and political experience. Here’s a general outline based on their political profiles as of 2024: ### **Kamala Harris: Pros and Cons** #### **Pros:** 1. **Experienced in Government**: Harris has served as Vice President under Joe Biden and has experience as a U.S. Senator and Attorney General of California. This gives her a strong background in legislative and executive roles. 2. **Focus on Social Justice**: She has advocated for criminal justice reform, racial equality, women’s rights, and LGBTQ+ rights. Her platform appeals to voters who prioritize progressive social policies. 3. **Advocate for Climate Action**: Harris has been a proponent of addressing climate change, supporting initiatives like the Green New Deal. Voters who see climate change as an urgent issue may favor her policies. 4. **Diverse Representation**: As the first woman of African-American and South Asian descent to serve as Vice President, her candidacy is seen as symbolically important for diversity and representation in leadership. 5. **International Relations**: Harris has been involved in various diplomatic efforts during her vice presidency, which may appeal to those who value a multilateral approach to global issues. #### **Cons:** 1. **Mixed Record on Criminal Justice**: While Harris promotes herself as a reformer, critics argue her tenure as California’s Attorney General was marked by tough-on-crime policies, including prosecutorial decisions that some say disproportionately affected minority communities. 2. **Perceived Lack of Strong Leadership**: Some critics argue that Harris has not demonstrated strong leadership or distinct achievements during her vice presidency, which may raise concerns about her ability to be an effective president. 3. **Polarizing Figure**: Harris’s progressive stance on issues like immigration, abortion rights, and healthcare may alienate moderate or conservative voters, leading to greater polarization. 4. **Economic Policy Criticisms**: Some conservatives argue that her support for higher taxes on the wealthy and increased government spending could harm economic growth and lead to greater national debt. 5. **Public Communication Style**: Harris has been critiqued for being less effective in public communication, with some voters perceiving her speeches as lacking depth or clarity on policy details. --- ### **Donald Trump: Pros and Cons** #### **Pros:** 1. **Economic Policies**: Trump is credited by his supporters with overseeing a period of strong economic growth, lower unemployment rates, and corporate tax cuts during his presidency. Voters who prioritize business-friendly policies and deregulation may favor his platform. 2. **America First Approach**: His emphasis on nationalism, trade deals favoring the U.S., and reduced foreign intervention appeals to voters who want a focus on domestic issues over global commitments. 3. **Strong Leadership Style**: Trump is seen as a decisive leader by his supporters, someone who isn’t afraid to challenge political norms or international institutions like NATO or the UN when he feels they do not serve U.S. interests. 4. **Appeals to Conservative Base**: Trump’s positions on issues such as immigration, gun rights, and judicial appointments align with conservative values, making him a popular choice for those who favor traditional, right-wing policies. 5. **Tax Cuts and Deregulation**: His tax reforms and deregulation efforts during his administration are seen by supporters as helping businesses and promoting economic growth. #### **Cons:** 1. **Legal and Ethical Controversies**: Trump’s presidency and post-presidential years have been marked by numerous legal challenges, including multiple indictments and investigations. Some voters may view his actions as undermining the rule of law and democratic norms. 2. **Polarizing and Divisive Rhetoric**: Trump’s often combative and inflammatory rhetoric on social media and in speeches has been accused of deepening political divisions in the U.S., particularly concerning race, immigration, and political violence. 3. **Handling of COVID-19**: His administration’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic has been widely criticized for downplaying the virus, contributing to a delayed response and high death toll. This could be a key issue for voters concerned about public health preparedness. 4. **Foreign Relations Strain**: Trump’s approach to international relations, particularly with traditional U.S. allies, has been described as transactional and has at times strained relationships with NATO, the European Union, and other international institutions. 5. **Impeachments and January 6th**: Trump was impeached twice during his presidency, once over the Ukraine scandal and again in connection with the January 6th Capitol riots. These events raise concerns for voters about his adherence to democratic principles. --- ### **Conclusion:** Voting for Kamala Harris or Donald Trump involves considering starkly different visions for the future of the U.S. Harris emphasizes social justice, climate action, and progressive policies, while Trump champions nationalism, economic deregulation, and conservative values. The choice will largely depend on individual priorities regarding governance style, domestic policies, and international relations, as well as the candidates' ability to address current challenges facing the U.S.

An interesting little statistic. The correlation between frequent lying and cognitive ability is negatively correlated (-0.26, p < 0.001)

This is interesting from The Hill. “Fox News anchor Bret Baier said former President Trump, not Vice President Harris, is keeping his network from hosting a second debate between the two candidates before Election Day”

If it implodes prior to Nov 5th do you think it will have any political effect? It would be quite nice if the dems were already pounding him on the stock market performance over the past 12 months and DJT performance.

Brilliant!

There’s been a bit of discussion and complaints in the Aussie media about more men choosing not to date and to stay single. It’s a decision I’ve pretty much made. I’ve got a great relationship with my kids and family, I’ve also just turned 50 and realised I’m comfortable in my ways. What triggered this post - well I have a dating profile that is live and I hadn’t deleted. Woke up to this message that fairly accurately sums up my experience of dating in Western Australia. Just most people are more discrete. Her very first message, no hello, no prior contact “How many figures u making Nigel”

Yup my mistake on the bishop, it’s been a while and I was 6 at the time. Also by ‘well’ it was a hell of a lot better than under Bob. Regarding Trump though this is interesting https://www.rawstory.com/trump-immigrant-serial-numbers/

It’s a complicated history. Don’t forget that there were sanctions in place prior to independence. The bush war was a stuff up ironically caused by the poorly educated whites in the first place (Maga equivalents). But it was western interference that put Mugabe in power instead of Bishop Tutu who actually won the first election and not Mugabe. It’s a whole conversation on its own and wasn’t meant to derail the Trump conversation.

I agree there will always be situations where it is has a net positive outcome. WW2 is one, I’m not entirely sure about Ukraine. That said maybe with America’s Hitler in a few years Germany could be allied with the Uk and helping to free Americans from a tyrannical Dictator.

Obviously the Rhodesian situation was not right, but it is long and complicated and it’s far from black and white. The point was the West Interfered and installed Mugabe - less than 3 years later there was genocide - which got ignored. 20 years later the country was on its knees. Now poverty is rampant, and the country is stuffed. The main point is that foreign interference often (usually?) does more harm than good. I picked on the US, but I was brought up with the belief that the British Empire had brought civilisation and salvation to the savages around the globe. If they didn’t learn about Jesus they were doomed.

I’m sorry to say but I think the world would be a better place if the US kept their noses out of other peoples business. Saddam was a nasty piece of work, but Iraq was relatively stable, Ian Smith was a nasty racist, but Rhodesia was prosperous and the entire population was doing ok. Then Thatcher and Jimmy Carter helped Mugabe in and Zimbabwe is in ruins. The list goes on …

I’ve heard Ron say that. I’m not sure Trump is capable of much strategic thought and thinking beyond the next 10 seconds. I can easily see the people around him being evil and using him strategically though. On the other hand I volunteered on a suicide/crisis hotline and had quite a few calls from people in the middle of psychotic breaks and the experience was very real for them. One of the most memorable was trying to calm a woman who believed she was the Virgin Mary and Princess Di was in heaven trying to kill her. Callers often had delusions of grandeur and being under attack (call me your highness or sir was quite common).

In all seriousness I have wondered if he has psychosis. He does bizarre stuff like waving at non existent people.

Survey data Fixed it, for some reason iPhone links don’t copy and paste directly into dropzone, I have to convert to plain text first and I missed part of the link.

Hey Joe, Correct I was just reflecting on it. Maybe ethics wasn’t the best word to sum it up (although it’s a great discussion to have). I still hold my opinion that as far as war goes, this was a very clever strategy to try as far as possible to minimise casualties. Until the BBC article I hadn’t fully considered the psychological harm to innocent people in the community in a widespread scale. By the way I like how Ken mentioned you having empathy, I agree with him. This discussion is what I really enjoy about speakers corner. Robust discussion with different points of view, no name calling and other silliness.

https://ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov.net/documents/ If you want insight into stupidity without having people spin the results this YouGov survey has some wild results. It gets really interesting around page 30 or so when they break results down by party, gender and race.

Going back to the ethics of the attack. This BBC report is interesting. I’m in the fence, on one hand the psychological harm to innocent people is awful and far more widespread than the inner circle and few innocents physically injured. But providing refuge and support for terrorists helps with their cause, this may drive a wedge where people distance themselves from the terrorist groups. From the BBC Many people here, and across the country, are inevitably wondering what will come next. Some even say they do not know if it is safe to walk next to other people, and are changing their plans. "Everyone is just panicking… We don’t know if we can stay next to our laptops, our phones. Everything seems like a danger at this point, and no one knows what to do,” one woman, Ghida, said. The confusion was made worse by rumours that spread on social media. One of them suggested that even solar panels were blowing up. "A state of panic overwhelmed people,” another woman said. “And frankly, this situation is very frightening”.