Why we DO need weapons of war...

[GripItAndRipIt]

Your assumption is that people are rational. Most notably, you are assuming that the gun grabbers are rational.

Again, think of the most average person, now, with a straight face, tell me that they are rational.

I am neither making such assumptions, nor am I the topic of this thread. I have made no assertion suggesting people are rational.

 

[solv3nt]

Now think about when Biden says "common sense gun control". I'm guessing you have common sense. Does your interpretation of what is common sense the same as his?

 

[Andy54Hawken]

I wonder if we could "logic-bomb" AI into acting irrationally... edit I think I read somewhere that someone was able to get an AI chatbot to display mental illness of some sort?

Soooo....
Are you saying all we gotta do is get AI to play with itself...?
Andy

 

[solv3nt]

I am neither making such assumptions, nor am I the topic of this thread. I have made no assertion suggesting people are rational.

Your argument has included the term rational, both against my arguments and @Andy54Hawken.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Soooo....
Are you saying all we gotta do is get AI to play with itself...?
Andy

I'm just saying if we can get AI to be as irrational as human beings; we'd be able to get them to our "level" and win with experience

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

I wonder if we could "logic-bomb" AI into acting irrationally... edit I think I read somewhere that someone was able to get an AI chatbot to display mental illness of some sort?

We need a tranche of viruses. But blasting them with bazookas would be a lot more satisfying.

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

Your argument has included the term rational, both against my arguments and @Andy54Hawken.

Please cite the post in which I claim "people are rational" as you falsely assert. Thank you.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

I'm just saying if we can get AI to be as irrational as human beings; we'd be able to get them to our "level" and win with experience

If I remember right....there was an old Star Trek episode ( original series ) where Kirk & Co. did just that.....
Andy

 

[titsonritz]

No gag reflex is nice butvI dunno, morning after guilt may still be a thing especially if the robot's not yours

However this is apparently a thing

Would You Put Your Penis in This Chinese Blowjob Machine?

Beyond collecting semen, the machine can also provide "premature ejaculation desensitization training."

www.menshealth.com

That makes me think they should do an X-rated parody of "Dawn of the Dead" with one of these things.

 

[titsonritz]

AI needs to be made illegal until the phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range has been perfected and readily available.

 

[red442joe]

they way I understand the whole gun control argument is thats not the part of the 2A thats being challenged.

regardless, anyone can reinterpret it, thats a fact or our rights would not be under attack. The 2A exists only as long as its codified on paper.
look at it like this, all it would take is a liberal scotus to say it has to be interpreted by todays standards instead of historical. The only reason scotus ruled they way they did in Bruen is because Trump got elected and appointed conservative justices. half the country disagrees, the whole thing is a matter of interpretation.

They, on that left side, are wrong.

Joe

 

[solv3nt]

Please cite the post in which I claim "people are rational" as you falsely assert. Thank you.

Sure you can do whatever you want... but not if you want to live in a rational universe. This is how we get men having menstrual periods and people with penises winning womens' swimming championships.

Words have meaning. Until they don't.

Agree. "Shall not" is in no way open to any interpretation in any rational sense of the word.

Only by irrational people. A woman is still a human female born with a vagina, and who will eventually grow to sexual maturity thus being the only kind of human capable of bearing offspring. A dude in a women's swimsuit is not a woman... in the rational universe.

Your entire argument of predicted on a rational world. A rational world is populated by rational people. You are upset that "shall not" shall not be open to interpretation. "Shall not", defined by rational individuals is not open to opinion.

My point is that you are basing your argument that we live in a rational world.

We take successfully redefined what a woman is, right wrong or indifferent, the definition has been accepted.

The gun grabbers are not rational, and they pander to an irrational base. You're arguing in circles, and as previously pointed out, you've fallen for confirmation bias.

 

[red442joe]

Being able to own RPG's, C4, etc. is insane. Too many damn crazies out there. Also do you think you could do anything once an advanced AI takes over? When that happens that will be the end of it. No amount of weapons will save humanity.

No it is not insane.
I own a bunch of explody stuff, and a bunch of shooty stuff.....Not. One. Single. Crazy. Action.

Joe

 

[solv3nt]

No it is not insane.
I own a bunch of explody stuff, and a bunch of shooty stuff.....Not. One. Single. Crazy. Action.

Joe

I stuffed my taxidermy dog with tannerite. He sits at the top of my stairs at the front door.

 

[red442joe]

Firstly, "shall not" is only a fraction of the whole amendment. Secondly, if it was so clear, this argument wouldn't exist. Thirdly, confirmation bias.

You are proving the point by interpreting the words of others how you want to instead of understanding what they actually mean.

Just because some want to declare it unclear, assert interpretation, and eliminate it, doesn't make them correct. Just willfully wrong.

Joe

 

[solv3nt]

Just because some want to declare it unclear, assert interpretation, and eliminate it, doesn't make them correct. Just willfully wrong.

Joe

Exactimundo

 

[CamoDeafie]

If anything, AI probably would want to start by taking over Japan not the least because, Japan; but because of all the tech and their culture which is essentially authoritarian and conformist

 

[red442joe]

I stuffed my taxidermy dog with tannerite. He sits at the top of my stairs at the front door.

OMG THAT'S INSANE!!!
Wait, why at the top of the stairs?
Was he your dog, or just a dog?
Pics!

Joe

 

[red442joe]

Now think about when Biden says "common sense gun control". I'm guessing you have common sense. Does your interpretation of what is common sense the same as his?

Not mine.
He is wrong.

Joe

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

Your entire argument of predicted on a rational world. A rational world is populated by rational people. You are upset that "shall not" shall not be open to interpretation. "Shall not", defined by rational individuals is not open to opinion.

My point is that you are basing your argument that we live in a rational world.

We take successfully redefined what a woman is, right wrong or indifferent, the definition has been accepted.

The gun grabbers are not rational, and they pander to an irrational base. You're arguing in circles, and as previously pointed out, you've fallen for confirmation bias.

Second reminder: I am not the topic of this thread. A factual rebuttal addressing the topic will better support your argument.

That said, thank you for the citations: Proving that your assertions about my position are incorrect. I have never argued that people are rational, and in fact my argument would suggest they generally are not. Evidence is the fact that there are even some people who think the phrase "Shall not" is open to interpretation! It is actually, but only if asserting a dog is a cat makes it a cat. We can dress it up like a cat and convince enough people that it is a cat, but it is not now and will never be... A CAT.