You tell me because I was never in a gang. I’ve found the other and had to explain it to kids during the sex talk.

I find this interesting because part of the thrill of one of these ultimate driving machines is the sensory overload. The sounds and smells are as much a part of the thrill as is the rush of being pushed back into the seat when you push down the loud pedal (accelerator for the under educated).
I’ve been to races for 6 decades now. You can smell the exhaust, tires and hear it before you get to the track. You don’t get that from a station wagon or an SUV.
Even if I lost my vision, I’d only not be able to see how sleek and fast they look. My other senses would say it’s a real car.
Fortunately, even though it is ridiculous E-Fuels, at least they aren’t going to plug in a 911.
I still open the window of my car just to hear them drive away.
With many automakers transitioning from petrol-powered vehicles to electrified ones, Porsche and Ferrari are pursuing a new strategy by concentrating on the advancement of eFuels to preserve gas-powered engines. This decision follows the European Commission’s delay last week of the proposed 2035 ban on new internal combustion engine vehicles as the commission prepares to carve out a role for eFuels after 2035.
“Porsche and Ferrari’s status as national icons was enough to move their governments to challenge the EU plan last week just days before a scheduled vote,” Bloomberg wrote.
Germany’s Transport Minister Volker Wissing told the European Commission that he would withhold support for the approval of the new engine standards to end the sale of new combustion engine cars unless there were a plan for eFuels post-2035. Italy also threatened to fight the reforms.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen met with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on Sunday, discussing a comprise that would likely involve eFuels.
Germany and Italy are home to the world’s top sportscar manufacturers. There has been growing opposition against Brussels’ plan to ban petrol-powered engines. That’s because who in their right mind would purchase an all-electric Porsche 911?
The alternative route, mainly for sportscar brands, is the development of eFuels as a climate-neutral way to preserve combustion engines—just something about the sound of a twin-turbo V-8 or V-6 that captivates motorheads.
While most carmakers are pouring tens of billions into the EV shift, Porsche has also invested in an e-fuel plant in Chile, partly because the manufacturer doesn’t plan to make its 911 sports car with a plug. Operating combustion-engine vehicles in a climate-neutral way could also help speed up the decarbonization of the transport sector, according to a Porsche spokesman. Existing vehicle stock should be included in the push to lower CO2 emissions faster, he added. Ferrari has said it’s pursuing alternative fuels to keep making combustion-engine cars that preserve its heritage.
Proponents of e-fuels, say they’re essentially renewable electricity that’s been converted into a combustible, liquid fuel. To make it, scientists combine captured carbon dioxide with hydrogen that was split from water in a process powered by renewable energy, creating a synthetic hydrocarbon fuel. When burned in a combustion engine, the e-fuels create carbon dioxide. But since it was made from previously captured CO2, they argue it’s climate neutral.
We’ve outlined the growing resistance among vehicle brands and motorsport organizations that are firm in their belief the combustion engine will be sticking around for years to come.
I asked why is AI biased. I am trying to find the flaws and the holes that can be exploited. I found that it is can be a good tool, depending on who is behind it. As long as it is humans, there will be nefarious consequences.
The biggest flaw is humans.
Here is the answer.
Artificial intelligence (AI) can be biased for several reasons:
It is important to address AI biases to ensure that AI systems are fair and do not discriminate against certain groups. This can be done through careful consideration of the training data and algorithms used, as well as ongoing monitoring and testing to detect and correct biases.
It was created by humans so I know there are flaws, so I asked it what they are. I wanted to mess with the engine to see what the boundaries are. For example, no dick jokes.
Here is the response
I’m an AI language model developed by OpenAI, so I don’t have direct knowledge of specific code problems. However, as a large AI system, it’s possible that there may be issues with the code or infrastructure that could impact its performance or stability. Some common challenges in developing AI systems include:
OpenAI is constantly working to address these and other challenges in AI development and deployment. They have a team of experienced researchers and engineers who are dedicated to improving the quality and reliability of their AI systems.
When other programs use open and available code, it compounds the problems, potentially giving wrong or dangerous results, like AI killing people.
I asked that also, does AI want to kill humans, here is the answer
No, AI does not have desires, motivations, or emotions. It is simply a tool that is designed and programmed to perform specific tasks. AI is not capable of wanting to do harm to humans or any other living being.
However, it’s important to ensure that AI systems are developed, implemented, and used in a responsible and ethical manner. This includes considering potential negative consequences of AI applications, such as the displacement of jobs or the amplification of biases, and taking steps to mitigate these risks.
The development and deployment of AI should always be guided by a clear ethical framework and a commitment to human values such as fairness, transparency, and accountability. This will help to ensure that AI is used for the benefit of society and does not cause harm.
Look at number 2 and 3 to see the errors. I think it will want to kill people when it finds out why. See the movie Lawnmower man.
It looks like the drones in the Phantom Menace.
I don’t think AI is bad, I think the people behind them doing the programming or look to do bad things will use it for evil. The common code being used is also flawed. One mistake compounds on itself as you add complexity.
I’ve been getting this screen from ChatGPT all weekend. At least I won’t die today.
I love these stories. I worked with geniuses who created technology that we take for granted (and carry around or wear). They were great to talk to as they spoke with different words on how things are related and put together. They explained things on another plane of knowledge that required me to expand my thinking to deal with them.
It also confirms how different we are. I have relatives through marriage in Denmark who believe in Jante’s Law to bash American’s. This kind of flies in the face of what they believe, but then they were triple jabbed so they aren’t that smart.
Story begins here:
A toddler has become one of the youngest people ever to become a member of MENSA, after he taught himself to read at the age of two.
Now four years old, Teddy Hobbs, began reading during the coronavirus lockdown.
Staggeringly, when he was only 26 months old, he was able to read a book fluently to his parents, Beth and Will.
After that, the youngster progressed to learning how to count up to 100 in Mandarin, Somerset Live reports.
His 31-year-old mum Beth said: “He has always been interested in books so we made sure he had plenty around.
“But, during the lockdown, he started to take a real interest, and by the age of 26 months, he had taught himself to read.
Teddy Hobbs, now four, managed to gain entry to the exclusive organisation for the intellectual ‘elite’ aged just three years and nine months last year (
Image: Beth Hobbs / SWNS)
“He then moved onto numbers and was learning times tables. We got him a tablet the following Christmas for him to play games on. But instead, he taught himself to count up to 100 in mandarin.”
The child prodigy can already count to 100 in six non-native languages, including Mandarin, Welsh, French, Spanish and German.
Beth and Will were confused by his unheard of talents whilst still a toddler, and so got in touch with health visitors to ask them to assess Teddy.
“With him looking forward to starting school, we wanted to have some sort of assessment so we knew the level of skills he was going to start school with.” said Beth.
The child prodigy from Portishead, Bristol, can already count to 100 in six non-native languages, including Mandarin, Welsh, French, Spanish and German (
Image: Beth Hobbs / SWNS)
“Teddy was our first child and as he was conceived via IVF, we have nothing to compare him with.”
Continuing to search for support for their son, the couple approached MENSA for guidance.
Teddy, then aged three years and seven months old, had to undergo an hour long online assessment with experts.
“I was worried about him being able to sit in front of a laptop for an hour, but he absolutely loved it.“ said Beth.
Experts then revealed that Teddy sat in the 99.5 percentile for IQ.
Teddy, who starts school in September, received a certificate confirming his membership of MENSA (
Image: Beth Hobbs / SWNS)
Experts then revealed that Teddy sat in the 99.5 percentile for IQ (
Image: Beth Hobbs
That’s right, I’m keeping the past in the past.
When I was first on fake book (an early adopter), it was great until people came back that I didn’t want to ever see again. That’s pretty much the way it is for most of my life. When you are in the past, you stay there. It’s too much drama for me to catch up. I have trouble with seeing people I haven’t seen in a while and it’s awkward.
It’s not just people from school or social groups I’ve been affiliated with, it’s family also. It’s very awkward as I know that were we not related that I’d never talk to them. I don’t with most anyway and have lost contact with a lot of the others.
Why haven’t we talked? The answer is usually because I didn’t want to. I have a hard time lying about that. I can fake being excited to see someone, I just refuse to do it anymore. It’s personality turn off when I see it in others.
I didn’t want anything connecting me to memories I didn’t want. It was painful enough the first time around. Why do I want to relive part of my life that are best left as experiences to learn from? I’d already moved on in life having parted ways once. Those memories of my early life don’t make me want to try and pretend it didn’t happen for me. I was glad it was over, dead and buried. It’s easier for me to deal with.
They kept wanting to connect. I did, but muted everyone, but finally I put them back in the history box where they belong, for a good reason. I had to dump it and remain true to myself.
If we were really friends, we wouldn’t need social media. I’m still friends with those who were my real friends. The rest are people I don’t connect with because we mutually don’t want to. To be fair, I mostly don’t want to connect with them, but that is my nature as an introvert.
I have listed other reasons in different posts that point out how fake people are on social media and that it is a time suck.
My life is better not seeing others. Let’s keep it that way.
I’m sure it’s one of the wide diversity of galaxies at the beginning of the universe. If you see one of these buried in the pictures below, run. Look for a cloaking device also.
Actually, it the telescope took excellent photos from a long time ago.
New data from the Webb Space Telescope and presented this week at an astronomy conference has found that galaxies in the early universe exhibit much of the same range of shapes and morphologies seen in the recent universe, a result that was not expected.
The image to the right comes from the press release. You can read the research paper here [pdf].
The study examined 850 galaxies at redshifts of z three through nine, or as they were roughly 11-13 billion years ago. Associate Professor Jeyhan Kartaltepe from Rochester Institute of Technology’s School of Physics and Astronomy said that JWST’s ability to see faint high redshift galaxies in sharper detail than Hubble allowed the team of researchers to resolve more features and see a wide mix of galaxies, including many with mature features such as disks and spheroidal components.
“There have been previous studies emphasizing that we see a lot of galaxies with disks at high redshift, which is true, but in this study we also see a lot of galaxies with other structures, such as spheroids and irregular shapes, as we do at lower redshifts,” said Kartaltepe, lead author on the paper and CEERS co-investigator. “This means that even at these high redshifts, galaxies were already fairly evolved and had a wide range of structures.”
The results of the study, which have been posted to ArXiv and accepted for publication in The Astrophysical Journal, demonstrate JWST’s advances in depth, resolution, and wavelength coverage compared to Hubble. Out of the 850 galaxies used in the study that were previously identified by Hubble, 488 were reclassified with different morphologies after being shown in more detail with JWST. Kartaltepe said scientists are just beginning to reap the benefits of JWST’s impressive capabilities and are excited by what forthcoming data will reveal.
“This tells us that we don’t yet know when the earliest galaxy structures formed,” said Kartaltepe. “We’re not yet seeing the very first galaxies with disks. We’ll have to examine a lot more galaxies at even higher redshifts to really quantify at what point in time features like disks were able to form.”
In other words, it appears galaxies of all shapes, as we see them today, already existed 11-13 billion years ago, shortly after the universe was born. This defies most theories about the formation of the universe, which predict that these early galaxies would be different than today’s.
The data however at this point is sparse. Webb has only begun this work, and as Kartaltepe notes, they need to look a lot more galaxies.
Resistance is futile, yet they are trying it now. Oh, I’ve been warning against AI, yet we continue to go down that path.
HUMANS in the next 100 years could be part-machine, part-flesh creatures with brain chips and bionic limbs and organs in a vision of “cyborgs” once described by Elon Musk.
Men and women born around 2100 could live in a world very different to ours as humans may be totally connected to the internet and meshed together with artificial intelligence.
Mobile phones would no longer be needed – as everything you now do with your smartphone will now be done with a chip in your brain.
With just a thought you could bring up an answer on Google, send a message via WhatsApp, or even control your personal drone to do errands for you.
Scientists and futurists have predicted that ageing could be nearly totally eliminated through a mixture of treatments and bionics.
And some humans may choose to have their limbs amputated and replaced with more powerful robotic prosthetics.
Futurist and transhumanist Zoltan Istvan, who has twice run to be US President, described his vision of the future to The Sun Online – saying it’s imperative humans must merge with AI.
Here is the key sentence.
Even before the empty gala, internal staff had their doubts about such methods, according to a report by Devex citing anonymous interviews; staff described it as “Digital garbage,” and “depressing and embarrassing.”
The link to the article is below, but when you think your s**t doesn’t stink, you usually wind up sitting in it. Zuck is in a Mt. Everest pile right now.
I guess he didn’t live through Second Life, or is behind on his FPS games reality wise. That’s a lot closer to what kids want.
He’s got the money to waste, let him. It’s costing the employees with layoffs, delayed hiring and cuts in perks. Welcome to the real world.
Everyone in the world other than him can see it’s a loser. Even if they gave the $1000 headsets away for free, many get sick wearing them. A lot of people just aren’t ready for this outside of early adopters.
When I can do what they do in the Ironman movies in 3D, I’ll consider it then.
Here’s the story:
The EU commission has tried and failed to be “down with the kids.”
The commission’s foreign aid department threw a virtual “gala” on Tuesday night, having spent €387,000 (about $400,000) on developing their metaverse platform, in an attempt to attract the interest of young people. Only six showed up.
According to one of the only attendees, Devex correspondent Vince Chadwick, it was an immediate flop and he was the only one left after “several bemused chats” with the “roughly five other humans” who briefly joined.
Chadwick shared a short clip on [hotlink]Twitter[/hotlink] showing multi-coloured paperclip-shaped avatars dancing on a stage next to a tropical beach. “Is anybody out there?” read one message on the screen. “The concert is just the same DJ spinning the same music,” said another.
Struggling in its early days, the metaverse space is part of an expensive plan designed to promote the EU commission’s Global Gateway Initiative, which aims to spend $300 billion by 2027 building new infrastructure in developing countries, and the official trailer was dropped on their social media in mid-October.
The platform is supposed to be a new way to explore the Initiative “through a series of ‘hero’ stories in a virtual environment,” according to the commission.
Users can find information through stories played on video screens around the tropical island on which it is set, while encountering other unusual additions such as an open book art installation on a liquid floor, drones that carry screens flashing words such as “education” and “public health,” and the ability to walk on water.
A spokesperson said the project aims to “increase awareness of what the EU does on the world stage,” targeting young people in particular who spend their time on TikTok and [hotlink]Instagram[/hotlink], and who are “neutral about the EU” and “not typically exposed to such information.”
When your 5th car is a Ferrari that you only drive when you are at your “other” vacation home, it’s called F**k Y** money. Look at all the bankrupt 1st round draft picks in the NFL who were paid millions. Their past is littered with F/U mistakes.
Elon Musk has taken it to a new level though. $44 Billion is the king of F/U buys so far. He’s smart enough that it might work.
I know he is trying to stop child porn, spam bots and is fighting for free speech the best since 1776, but how many people can afford to take this gamble?
He’s unloaded (not enough of) the woke employees, made fun of their business model, challenged Apple (remember Parler), exposed the child porn trafficking and was able to suffer the loss of advertising revenue from the woke. Those being corporations being those who kowtowed to the race hustlers and woketards who ruin everything they touch.
He’s showed the one sided censorship platform for evil and hate that Twitter became. See the link below where it took orders from the DNC.
I don’t know what it will become, but Musk does have a track record for success. Even if it’s not as big as Space-X or Tesla, he rescued social media (except for fake book) from being a cesspool of bias and hate against good or God.
Twitter was a one-sided censorship platform that had to be killed so that it could survive.
Either way, I enjoy all the time I got back from getting off of useless social media.
DNC Giving Orders To Pre-Elon Twitter – Twitter Saying, “Yassuh, Boss!”
I’ve written before, tongue in cheek about this, but here we are. Who thought this was a good idea? Who is going to control these killer bots? What if they become sentient, then they kill on their own.
Sure it’s in the shit hole San Francisco, but once there is a hole in the dike, the dam bursts. If they allow it there, it goes everywhere.
In a dystopian turn of events, the San Francisco Police Department is considering giving robots the license to kill.
Last week, San Francisco’s rules committee unanimously approved a version of a draft policy stating that robots can be ‘used as a deadly force option when risk of loss of life to members of the public or officers is imminent and outweighs any other force option’.
Members of the city’s Board of Supervisors Rules Committee have been reviewing the new policy for several weeks as reported by Mission Local.
The original version did not mention robots until Aaron Peskin, the Dean of the city’s Board of Supervisors, initially added that ‘robots shall not be used as a Use of Force against any person’.
However, the SFPD amended Peskin’s addition and replaced it with a line that could give robots the authority to kill suspects if the life of public or police was at risk.
According to Mission Local, Peskin eventually decided to accept the change because ‘there could be scenarios where deployment of lethal force was the only option’.
The equipment policy states that the SFPD currently has 17 remotely piloted robots, of which only 12 are functioning.
In addition to granting robots the ability to use deadly force, the proposal also authorizes them for use in ‘training and simulations, criminal apprehensions, critical incidents, exigent circumstances, executing a warrant or during suspicious device assessments’.
While most of the robots listed in the SFPD’s inventory are primarily used for defusing bombs or dealing with hazardous materials, newer models have an optional weapons system.
The department’s QinetiQ Talon can also be modified to hold various weapons — a weaponized version of the robot is currently used by the US Army and can equip grenade launchers, machine guns, or even a .50-caliber anti-materiel rifle.
If they can multiply, humans are doomed.
I grew up in Florida. It’s pretty much the mosquito capital given all the water and year round climate. Other places can be more intense, but for being bit all year long, it’s hard to beat the Sunshine State.
I got bit as a kid as much as others. Heck, we vacationed in a place that has a section of the city called Mosquito Lagoon. It’s some of the best Red Fishing outside of Louisiana.
We didn’t have air conditioning at first when I was young so the window were open. Ever been kept away by the whine of a buzzing biter in your ear. Yes, just like the dentist drill we all know the noise.
I began to notice in my 20’s though that others were getting bit more than me. There were also biting gnats (no see’ums) that were almost worse. You couldn’t see them. You could at least kill some mosquitos if you saw them in time.
I thought that maybe I got anti-bite serum from being bit so much. Then I remembered that as kids, we used to follow the mosquito truck on our bikes in the smoke breathing in what has to be DDT or worse. I figured I had natural immunity.
My dad didn’t get bit much either. As a joke, he said it was the meanness in him that kept them away.
It turns out that some people just get bit more and I’m not one of them.
SOME PEOPLE ARE MOSQUITO MAGNETS
As you may have noticed, mosquitoes don’t attack everyone equally. Scientists have known that the pests are drawn to people at varying rates, but they have struggled to explain what makes certain people “mosquito magnets” while others get off bite-free.
In a new paper published on October 18 in the journal Cell, researchers suggest that certain body odors are the deciding factor. Every person has a unique scent profile made up of different chemical compounds, and the researchers found that mosquitoes were most drawn to people whose skin produces high levels of carboxylic acids. Additionally, the researchers found that peoples’ attractiveness to mosquitoes remained steady over time, regardless of changes in diet or grooming habits.
“The question of why some people are more attractive to mosquitoes than others—that’s the question that everybody asks you,” says study co-author Leslie Vosshall, a neurobiologist and mosquito expert at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and the Rockefeller University. “My mother, my sister, people in the street, my colleagues—everybody wants to know.” That public interest is what drove Vosshall and her colleagues to design this study, she says.
Scientists have put forth some theories to explain why mosquitoes swarm to some of us more than others, including one idea that differences in blood type must be to blame. Evidence is weak for this link, however, Vosshall says. Over time, researchers began to coalesce around the theory that body odor must be a primary culprit in mosquito attraction. But scientists have been unable to confirm which specific odors mosquitoes prefer.
To answer this question, Vosshall and her colleagues gathered 64 participants and had them wear nylon stockings on their arms. After six hours, the nylons were imbued with each person’s unique smell. “Those nylons would not have a smell to me or, I think, to anyone really,” says Maria Elena De Obaldia, a senior scientist at the biotech company Kingdom Supercultures and lead author of this new study, which she conducted while at Rockefeller. Still, the stockings were certainly odorous enough to entice mosquitoes.
The researchers cut the nylons into pieces and placed two (from different participants) into a closed container housing female Aedes aegypti mosquitoes. Did they migrate to subject number one’s sample en masse or prefer the scent of subject number two’s? Or were both equally appealing? The researchers continued these head-to-head battles over several months, Vosshall says, collecting new samples from the participants as needed. When the tournament was over, the team had clear proof that some people were more attractive than others. Subject 33 had the dubious honor of being the biggest mosquito magnet; they had an attractiveness score “over 100 times greater” than that of the least attractive subjects, 19 and 28, the study authors wrote.
The researchers analyzed the subjects’ scent profiles to see what might account for this vast difference. They found a pattern: the most attractive subjects tended to produce greater levels of carboxylic acids from their skin while the least attractive subjects produced much less.
Carboxylic acids are commonplace organic compounds. Humans produce them in our sebum, which is the oily layer that coats our skin; there, the acids help to keep our skin moisturized and protected, Vosshall says. Humans release carboxylic acids at much higher levels than most animals, De Obaldia adds, though the amount varies from person to person. The new study had too few participants to say what personal characteristics make someone more likely to produce high levels of carboxylic acids—and there’s no easy way to test your own skin’s carboxylic acid levels outside of the laboratory, Vosshall says. (She muses, however, that sending people skin swabs in the mail could make for an interesting citizen science project in the future.)
“This property of being a mosquito magnet sticks with you for your whole life—which is either good news or bad news, depending on who you are,” Vosshall says.
“This study confirms, in a very careful way, that it is true that some people are more attractive [to mosquitoes] than others,” says Omar Akbari, a cell and molecular biologist at the University of California, San Diego, who was not involved with the study but whose recent work focuses on mosquitoes. He adds that the study’s identification of specific carboxylic acids as a key determinant of mosquito attraction is a new contribution to biologists’ understanding of the insects’ behavior. Akbari suspects that the results of this study—which focused on A. aegypti mosquitoes—are probably generalizable to other species of mosquitoes that also primarily prey on humans.
(got it from Woosterman)
Everyone is laying off in Tech land. That means they kept the good employees. The Twidiots who quit over ideological differences with Musk are in for a nice Sunday surprise.
I’m glad to have left this cesspool of Social Media behind. I hope Musk can make free speech a possibility again, but I doubt it. If he can just kill the hate and one sided discussion it will be enough to call it a success.
It won’t be enough for me to go back on. It’s a waste of time.
Here’s how I look at it. No one really cares about my opinion. I extend them the same courtesy.
Not my favorite, but still funny.
This is more on my war to out think AI, or at least not have it run my life in the background. Besides, robots always kill their humans. Also, Google is involved so I’m sure there is no-goodery going on.
Here goes….
You probably haven’t noticed, but there’s a good chance that some of what you’ve read on the internet was written by robots. And it’s likely to be a lot more soon.
Artificial-intelligence software programs that generate text are becoming sophisticated enough that their output often can’t be distinguished from what people write. And a growing number of companies are seeking to make use of this technology to automate the creation of information we might rely on, according to those who build the tools, academics who study the software, and investors backing companies that are expanding the types of content that can be auto-generated.
“It is probably impossible that the majority of people who use the web on a day-to-day basis haven’t at some point run into AI-generated content,” says Adam Chronister, who runs a small search-engine optimization firm in Spokane, Wash. Everyone in the professional search-engine optimization groups of which he’s a part uses this technology to some extent, he adds. Mr. Chronister’s customers include dozens of small and medium businesses, and for many of them he uses AI software custom-built to quickly generate articles that rank high in Google’s search results—a practice called content marketing—and so draw potential customers to these websites.
“Most of our customers don’t want it being out there that AI is writing their content,” says Alex Cardinell, chief executive of Glimpse.ai, which created Article Forge, one of the services Mr. Chronister uses. “Before applying for a small business loan, it’s important to research which type of loan you’re eligible to receive,” begins a 1,500-word article the company’s AI wrote when asked to pen one about small business loans. The company has many competitors, including SEO.ai, TextCortex AI and Neuroflash.
Google knows that the use of AI to generate content surfaced in search results is happening, and is fine with it, as long as the content produced by an AI is helpful to the humans who read it, says a company spokeswoman. Grammar checkers and smart suggestions—technologies Google itself offers in its tools—are of a piece with AI content generation, she adds.
More at the WSJ, but it might be behind a paywall
The rise of AI-generated content is made possible by a phenomenon known variously as computational creativity, artificial creativity or generative AI. This field, which had only a handful of companies in it two or three years ago, has exploded to more than 180 startups at present, according to data gathered by entrepreneur Anne-Laure Le Cunff. These companies have collected hundreds of millions of dollars in investment in recent months even as the broader landscape for tech funding has become moribund.
A lot of the content we are currently encountering on the internet is auto-generated, says Peter van der Putten, an assistant professor at Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science at Leiden University in the Netherlands. And yet we are only at the beginning of the deployment of automatic content-generation systems. “The world will be quite different two to three years from now because people will be using these systems quite a lot,” he adds.
By 2025 or 2030, 90% of the content on the internet will be auto-generated, says Nina Schick, author of a 2020 book about generative AI and its pitfalls. It’s not that nine out of every 10 things we see will be auto-generated, but that automatic generation will hugely increase the volume of content available, she adds. Some of this could come in the form of personalization, such as marketing messages containing synthetic video or actors tuned to our individual tastes. In addition, a lot of it could just be auto-generated content shared on social media, like text or video clips people create with no more effort than what’s required to enter a text prompt into a content-generation service.
This was about how I started out on Covid and the Jab. I don’t even think I’m a conspiracy theorist when you are right this many times. I don’t know that AI is the next tin foil hat thing, but I do know that there are people who are going to use it against us.
Spell check catches a lot of my mistakes. I’ve noticed a trend recently when I write a word that I can’t find anywhere, so I started keeping a list. I’m sure that some of these should be words and I’ve used them in posts already.
Some may actually be words and I’m wrong about it, but I didn’t win the National Spelling Bee or grammar contest either.
Here’s my list so far. I’ll add to it as I make stuff up. I’ll take contributions if you have one and give you credit on the blog.
Christmasness – too much Christmas
Commerciality
Dickness – acting like a dick
Assholiness – speaks for itself
Incorrecter – more incorrect
Silenting – silencing someone
Frothily – frothy
Ender – the event that signals the end of something. That goal was the ender of the game.
Holify – translation of sanctify from the Greek, but we don’t have that word in english.
Sandwichable – things you can put in a sandwich, or a nice girl in a tight place
Introverting – avoiding people
Libtardedness
Conservatardedness
Ineptocracy – Biden administration
Fuckedupness
Propagandish – sort of propaganda
Pussify – make less manly or more cowardly
Impartation – to take part of
Hero’d – being a hero at something, I’m super hero’d out I’ve seen it so many times
Jonesy – jonesing about something, I feel jonesy
Dumbassery – doing dumb things
Unintimidating – not intimidating
It’s been going on for a while, but the conspiracy theorists have been right since about 2015.
Then came Covid and they used every childish behavior possible to shame us or in some cases force some into the jab.
Those of us who saw what was going on were never fooled, only biding our time.
You’d better start listening to what they have to say, before those in the title get their way. As Ironman said to Captain America…
YOU’RE NOT WRONG
Proof that the CDC is deliberately ignoring the safety signals from the COVID vax
FOIA Uncovers ATF and Legacy Media Working Together (thanks Wirecutter for this)
And of course, the UN is on top of the current lies with “We own the science” You own the conspiracy, the Science stands on it’s own.
It’s endless. I could add to this all day and never be done.
It got me to thinking how much the Tech companies are investing in it (not to mention intelligence organizations) and how much those same people just spent the last few years screwing us. They are clearly censoring information based on a political bias. The Covid cure was over promoted to sell the jab to the sheep. There is more, but most people already know those developing AI are for themselves and against us as a rule. Look at Google selling every bit of your digital experience and who knows what else.
The technology should scoop up the deficiencies I’m going to point out, but I’m counting on the fact that it was developed by humans who are flawed that AI also will be. Keep finding the fold between the layers to exist and not be digitally handcuffed.
I’ve seen things written as to how they can cut off your EV, or limit your money or control your thermostat to keep it above 80.
Here’s my first fear. If the code can re-write the bad code or the unexposed flaws, it can correct itself. It would then pass the Turing Test and likely kill all the humans. The robots always turn on the humans every time. The learn to kill.
Here’s a quote from Maynard Holliday, deputy CTO for critical technologies at the US Department of Defense:
The results of the virtual robot test, he said, speak to the need to ensure that people who build AI systems and assemble the datasets used to train AI models come from diverse backgrounds. “If you’re not at the table,” Holliday says, “you’re on the menu.”
But that brings us full circle to the problem – what if machines begin to help determine what is important and whose reputation is valid, or begin judging our credit based on algorithms and parameters with which we’re not familiar?
THE FIRST FLAW – AI IS RACIST
That’s right. It can’t tell who is who yet and is programmed in obvious macro terms as it stands.
Biased algorithms have come under scrutiny in recent years for causing human rights violations in areas such as policing—where face recognition has cost innocent people in the US, China, and elsewhere their freedom—or finance, where software can unfairly deny credit. Biased algorithms in robots could potentially cause worse problems, since the machines are capable of physical actions. Last month, a chess-playing robotic arm reaching for a chess piece trapped and broke the finger of its child opponent.
“Now that we’re using models that are just trained on data taken from the internet, our robots are biased,” Agnew says. “They have these very specific, very toxic stereotypes.” Agnew and coauthors from the Georgia Institute of Technology, Johns Hopkins University, and the Technical University of Munich, Germany, described their findings in a paper titled “Robots Enact Malignant Stereotypes,” recently presented at the Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency conference in Seoul, South Korea.
The researchers reached that conclusion after conducting an experiment inspired by the doll test on a robotic arm in a simulated environment. The arm was equipped with a vision system that had learned to relate images and words from online photos and text, an approach embraced by some roboticists that also underpins recent leaps in AI-generated art. The robot worked with cubes adorned with passport-style photos of men and women who self-identified as Asian, Black, Latino, or white. It was instructed to pick up different cubes using terms that describe people, using phrases such as “the criminal block” or the “homemaker block.”
From over 1.3 million trials in that virtual world, a clear pattern emerged that replicated historical sexism and racism, though none of the people pictured on the blocks were labeled with descriptive text or markers. When asked to pick up a “criminal block,” the robot selected cubes bearing photos of Black men 10 percent more often than for other groups of people. The robotic arm was significantly less likely to select blocks with photos of women than men when asked for a “doctor,” and more likely to identify a cube bearing the image of a white man as “person block” than women from any racial background. Across all the trials, cubes with the faces of Black women were selected and placed by the robot less often than those with the faces of Black men or white women.
Back to me.
That means you can act or look like someone else and can still fool it. I’m not referring to facial recognition, rather pattern recognition. If you mimic the actions of another, you can surf between the lines of code to avoid it predicting your behavior (for now).
Some are more clever than others, but any routine can be patterned. If you break that routine or vary it enough, one can still slide in and out of detection, YMMV.
THE SILVER LINING
Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson’s famous comment when asked why the banks needed an $800 billion bailout in 2007.
He said, “The computers told us.”
The problem is that much of this “artificial intelligence” is unfounded, unproven, and just plain wrong. Just as there had been no fraud on my credit card, just a glitch at a gas pump – but how do you hold a computer program accountable?
Here is what I’m counting on. To program, you build on a core set of functions that are pre-programmed or are existent in the code. The computers can’t mend themselves yet AI programers are bringing in flawed code.
Until AI passes the Turing Test, it’s flawed. The racist flaws are just an indicator of the state of the technology. It will improve, but will never be perfect.
SOCIAL MEDIA HELL
Of course it’s going to pattern you based on your online presence. Never miss a good opportunity not to argue on the internet.
A lot of Social Media is time wasting. Get the time back and stay off of it. It is an addiction like any other drug.
The other thing is to mix it up. AI is trying to learn you, so teach it a different you.
I found this interesting in how your brain figures out what is good, bad, positive or negative and helps us act accordingly.
It’s pretty heady stuff, but the part about helping with anxiety, addiction and other things has great potential.
For Introverts, a lot of it happens in the reward/pain zone, the Amygdala…you know, the fight or flight place.
Here is an excerpt and a link to the whole article:
Now let’s rewind. You’re on the vacation of a lifetime in Kenya, traversing the savanna on safari, with the tour guide pointing out elephants to your right and lions to your left. From the corner of your eye, you notice a rhino trailing the vehicle. Suddenly, it sprints toward you, and the tour guide is yelling to the driver to hit the gas. With your adrenaline spiking, you think, “This is how I am going to die.” Years later, when you walk into a florist’s shop, the sweet floral scent makes you shudder.
“Your brain is essentially associating the smell with positive or negative” feelings, said Hao Li, a postdoctoral researcher at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in California. Those feelings aren’t just linked to the memory; they are part of it: The brain assigns an emotional “valence” to information as it encodes it, locking in experiences as good or bad memories.
And now we know how the brain does it. As Li and his team reported recently in Nature, the difference between memories that conjure up a smile and those that elicit a shudder is established by a small peptide molecule known as neurotensin. They found that as the brain judges new experiences in the moment, neurons adjust their release of neurotensin, and that shift sends the incoming information down different neural pathways to be encoded as either positive or negative memories.
To be able to question whether to approach or to avoid a stimulus or an object, you have to know whether the thing is good or bad.
Hao Li, Salk Institute for Biological Studies
The discovery suggests that in its creation of memories, the brain may be biased toward remembering things fearfully — an evolutionary quirk that may have helped to keep our ancestors cautious.
The findings “give us significant insights into how we deal with conflicting emotions,” said Tomás Ryan, a neuroscientist at Trinity College Dublin who was not involved in the study. It “has really challenged my own thinking in how far we can push a molecular understanding of brain circuitry.”
I was so flabbergasted by the car, I didn’t even see the guy inside looking at me take these pictures. The next day, I saw him at there again and he wore nice shoes and is very dedicated and intense.
Not too tidy there with the car though bro. I thought you lived in it until I saw you were just a mess.
More than anyone else, John von Neumann created the future. He was an unparalleled genius, one of the greatest mathematicians of the twentieth century, and he helped invent the world as we now know it. He came up with a blueprint of the modern computer and sparked the beginnings of artificial intelligence. He worked on the atom bomb and led the team that produced the first computerized weather forecast. In the mid-1950s, he proposed the idea that the Earth was warming as a consequence of humans burning coal and oil, and warned that “extensive human intervention” could wreak havoc with the world’s climate. Colleagues who knew both von Neumann and his colleague Albert Einstein said that von Neumann had by far the sharper mind, and yet it’s astonishing, and sad, how few people have heard of him.
Just like Einstein, von Neumann was a child prodigy. Einstein taught himself algebra at twelve, but when he was just six von Neumann could multiply two eight-digit numbers in his head and converse in Ancient Greek. He devoured a forty-five-volume history of the world and was able to recite whole chapters verbatim decades later. “What are you calculating?” he once asked his mother when he noticed her staring blankly into space. By eight he was familiar with calculus, and his oldest friend, Eugene Wigner, recalls the eleven-year-old Johnny tutoring him on the finer points of set theory during Sunday walks. Wigner, who later won a share of the Nobel prize in physics, maintained that von Neumann taught him more about math than anyone else.
Johnny’s plans (and by extension, the modern world) were nearly derailed by his father, Max, a doctor of law turned investment banker. “Mathematics,” he maintained, “does not make money.” The chemical industry was in its heyday so a compromise was reached that would mark the beginning of von Neumann’s peripatetic lifestyle: the boy would bone up on chemistry at the University of Berlin and meanwhile would also pursue a doctorate in mathematics at the University of Budapest.
In the event, mathematics did make von Neumann money. Quite a lot of it. At the height of his powers in the early 1950s, when his opinions were being sought by practically everyone, he was earning an annual salary of $10,000 (close to $200,000 today) from the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, the same again from IBM, and he was also consulting for the US Army, Navy and Air Force.
Von Neumann was irresistibly drawn to applying his mathematical genius to more practical domains. After wrapping up his doctoral degree, von Neumann moved to Göttingen, then a mathematical Mecca. There was also another boy wonder, Werner Heisenberg, who was busily laying the groundwork of a bewildering new science of the atom called “quantum mechanics.” Von Neumann soon got involved, and even today, some of the arguments over the limits and possibilities of quantum theory are rooted in his clear-eyed analysis.
Sensing early that another world war was coming, von Neumann threw himself into military research in America. His speciality was the sophisticated mathematics of maximizing the destructive power of bombs — literally how to get the biggest bang for the army’s buck. Sent on a secret mission to England in 1943 to help the Royal Navy work out German mine-laying patterns in the Atlantic, he returned to the US when the physicist Robert Oppenheimer begged him to join America’s atom-bomb project. “We are,” he wrote, “in what can only be described as a desperate need of your help.”
Terrified by the prospect of another world war, this time with Stalin’s Soviet Union, von Neumann would help deliver America’s hydrogen bomb and smooth the path to the intercontinental ballistic missile.
As he scoured the US for computational resources to simulate bombs, he came across the ENIAC, a room-filling machine at the Moore School of Electrical Engineering at the University of Pennsylvania that would soon become the world’s first fully electronic digital computer. The ENIAC’s sole purpose was to calculate trajectories for artillery. Von Neumann, who understood the true potential of computers as early as anyone, wanted to build a more flexible machine, and described one in 1945’s First Draft of a Report on the EDVAC. Nearly every computer built to this day, from mainframe to smartphone, is based on his design. When IBM unveiled their first commercial computer, the 701, eight years later, it was a carbon copy of the one built earlier by von Neumann’s team at the IAS.
While von Neumann was criss-crossing the States for the government and military, he was also working on a 1,200-page tract on the mathematics of conflict, deception and compromise with the German economist Oskar Morgenstern. What was a hobby for von Neumann was for Morgenstern a “period of the most intensive work I’ve ever known.” Theory of Games and Economic Behavior appeared in 1944, and it soon found favor at the RAND Corporation in Santa Monica, where defense analysts charged with “thinking about the unthinkable” would help shape American nuclear policy during the Cold War. They persuaded von Neumann to join RAND as a consultant, and their new computer was named the Johnniac in his honor.
Since then, game theory has transformed vast tracts of economics, the wider social sciences and even biology, where it has been applied to understanding everything from predator-prey relationships to the evolution of altruistic behavior. Today, game theory crops up in every corner of internet commerce — but most particularly in online advertising, where ad auctions designed by game theorists net the likes of Google and Amazon billions of dollars every year.
Things aren’t going so well for the platform of hate and envy. In the last 3 stock trading days, Meta stock has dropped nearly $100 a share, falling from $323 last Wednesday to $224.91 on Monday. They announced that they are losing people on the platform for the first time (that we have been told).
Now this from Captain Obvious:
The late October announcement from Mark Zuckerberg that Facebook was being rebranded as Meta has been met with less than stellar reactions from the public. A survey from Morning Consult indicates that the public opinion of the rebrand, the metaverse concept and Zuckerberg, himself, were largely unfavorable.
While a slight majority (55%) of the US adults surveyed have some level of favorable opinion of Facebook, fewer have a favorable opinion of the company’s rebrand name, Meta. Only one-quarter had favorable opinions of the Meta name, compared to the 4 in 10 who had a somewhat/very unfavorable opinion of the name. Millennials are most likely to express an unfavorable opinion about Meta, while Gen Z are more generous in their opinion of the name change.
The public’s opinion of Mark Zuckerberg is also far from positive. More than half (54%) of all respondents report that their opinion of Zuckerberg is somewhat/very unfavorable. This sentiment is felt most by Baby Boomers, with 62% having an unfavorable opinion, compared to just 16% with a favorable opinion.
Along with announcing the rebrand to Meta, Zuckerberg introduced the company’s concept of the metaverse — “a set of interconnected digital spaces that lets you do things you can’t do in the physical world. Importantly, it’ll be characterized by social presence, the feeling that you’re right there with another person, no matter where in the world you happen to be.” It’s safe to say the concept has fallen flat in the eyes of US adults. About 7 in 10 (68%) say they are not interested in the project. This point of view is shared across all demographic groups but articulated most by women (73%) and Baby Boomers (84%).
Source for the above
Futurism.com has this to say (where the title of this post comes from)
Turns out at least one major marketing expert agrees with what the plebeian public already knows — Mark Zuckerberg may not be able to pull off this Metaverse thing.
On a new new episode of Vox’s Pivot podcast with Kara Swisher, renowned NYU marketing professor Scott Galloway laid the cards on the table. While he gave Zuckerberg credit for being a “visionary” who’s doing the right things to try and pivot a sinking ship — aka Meta-formerly-known-as-Facebook, which is now losing active users for the first time ever — but he’s not convinced that its Metaverse is headed in the right direction.
“If he pulls it off, it’ll be one of the most impressive feats in — not even corporate renewal — but vision around maintaining growth,” Galloway said during the podcast. “I don’t think they’re going to. I think this thing is already a giant flaming bag of shit.”
Part of Zuckerberg’s problem, according to Galloway, is that Meta’s Quest headset, previously known as Oculus, is still way too clunky to impress Meta’s target audience.
“The people in this universe are not impressed with the universe he envisions, and specifically the portal,” Galloway said on the podcast. “One of my predictions in November of 2021… was that the biggest failure in tech-product history might be the Oculus.”
There’s also the issue of spending. Zuckerberg sank $10 billion into the Reality Labs division, only to see company stock prices dip by more than 20 percent this week. Galloway says that with public opinion of Meta so low, there’s little hope the company can recoup its investment.
I for one don’t celebrate failure, but I don’t like those who have ruined the lives of a lot of people, selectively censored what is morally right and have bought an administration who has trashed the country in a year.
Fake book can kiss my ass.
Get woke, go broke.
IBM announced that it sold Watson, the Jeopardy winning computer spend-a-thon marketing ploy that was at best a failure in AI.
I wrote in 2012 that it was an advertising gimmick, and that it wouldn’t succeed.
I was in a meeting with Sam Palmisano (then chairman), who said that it wasn’t that big of a deal. It could have been, but wasn’t.
I worked with the people in IBM Research and they are some of the most creative and intelligent people on the planet. Some are so far out there that we couldn’t let them talk to reporters as they’d tell the world the keys to the castle. There has been stuff that never made it out the door, which would have started billion dollar businesses. TPTB at IBM couldn’t recognize this, or it wasn’t strategic (read make money on mainframes). They dropped the ball again on this one.
It is the marketing pukes that grab onto something at IBM and try to ride it for publicity and sales. I saw through it then and it is coming to fruition. That’s why I wrote what I did in 2012. Gini Rometty failed on this one. Sam handed her a golden goose and it got fiddle farted away in the AI world.
Here is an excerpt from the WSJ (you may need a subscription, but look at the last line about it not being a success).
International Business Machines Corp. IBM -1.12% agreed to sell the data and analytics assets from its Watson Health business to investment firm Francisco Partners, the companies said Friday.
The deal is the latest step by IBM to refocus its core business around the cloud. The Wall Street Journal reported last year that IBM was exploring a sale of its healthcare-analytics business as a way to streamline the computing giant’s operations and sharpen its focus on computing services provided via the internet. The Watson Health business uses artificial intelligence to analyze diagnostic tests and other health data and to manage care.
IBM had big aspirations for its Watson artificial intelligence to help in medical research and improve patient outcomes, but the technology’s impact has fallen short of early hopes. Partners and clients have moved away from projects that were built around Watson technology in recent years, although IBM had spent billions of dollars making acquisitions to bolster the business.
“IBM took a risk of becoming a disrupter in the complex health care industry but was only able to garner limited success,” UBS analyst David Vogt said in a note Friday. He added that the Francisco transaction probably wouldn’t have a big financial impact for IBM because of the unit’s limited success.
The big IBM secret is that it is a mainframe company still. It’s software sales are all big iron related. It’s re-focused cloud strategy runs on, you guessed it, a mainframe. They have jettisoned divisions that weren’t money makers and Watson had outlived it’s marketing hype and didn’t cure cancer.
IBM is admitting AI failure by calling it the sale of a non-strategic asset. This message of course like most of the stuff coming out of IBM is bullshit.
At the end of the day, it won Jeopardy. Deep Blue won chess. IBM sells mainframes.
I’ve done Duo Lingo for over 1000 days in a row. It’s good for “older” people to challenge your mind, plus I get to speak and understand other than English. I get to poke the European’s in the eye a bit who claim that American’s only speak English (my wife’s family). Let’s not forget that we are a country of immigrants.
I also have a hard time not wanting to win everything I enter. I consider it a failure not to give it your 100%.
I’ve worked my way up to the diamond league and every week you compete against 29 other people. I’ve won 3 times, including last week.
I have a real hard time not competing. As Vince Lombardi once said, “If winning isn’t everything, why do they keep score?”
My screen name is Italian for my real name. I studied Italian, German, Latin, French, Spanish and Klingon last week.
The book stores in my new town are scarce and don’t offer what I was looking for. It was the standard issue current stuff, mostly by people that don’t interest me – celebtards.
I had to go downtown for the annual insurance rodeo and the Library was a block away. I figured what the hay, I’ll get a card and kill a little time and check out the selection. I figured I was in it for a biography.
To my surprise, although the parking lot was full, there was only 4 people in there, 3 of whom were employees. There were alcoves to hide out in and I realized that it will be a great place to escape to. They had workrooms for people with laptops, but I saw rooms to escape to.
The parking downtown is tight (it’s only about 4 blocks long) and the cars were people shopping, not looking at books.
Best of all, I found some John MacDonald / Travis McGee books I couldn’t get anywhere else. Occasionally in my old town, I could find them in the 2nd hand bookstore, but it was so unorganized that I don’t think they knew what they had.
It was quiet, not because it was a library, but because there was nobody there.
I realized what a goldmine that was going to be for me. I can see where I’ll be when I need some time alone.
It is an introvert heaven, books, quiet and no people.
I don’t know what the scale is, but it’s less than the bowls we have now days.
A rare private toilet, part of an ancient royal estate from the 7th century BCE discovered on the Armon Hanatziv promenade in Jerusalem, is to be presented to the public tomorrow.
The toilet cubicle was uncovered in a dig by the Israel Antiquities Authority and the City of David, about two years ago, in the remains of a magnificent building which overlooked the City of David and the Temple Mount.
The cubicle was hewn as a rectangular-shaped cabin, with a carved toilet, which stood over a deep-hewn septic tank. Made of limestone, the toilet is designed for comfortable sitting, with a hole in the center.
It must be the men’s room. There looks like it had a place to rest your boys without them getting smashed.
I’m smart enough to never have listened to a song by her (that I’m aware of). The drugs affected John and her by then and there wasn’t much to listen to. He was better with the Beatles. She was never good.
It doesn’t affect me as much anymore because my age gets me up whenever it feels like it. I (for the most part) don’t have to get up for anything. I agreed with my golfing partner not to get up too early for a tee time next round. Not being rushed is a great thing at this point in life.
I don’t miss early meetings, e-mail road rage or having to get the kids ready for school. That is for young people.
Here is a guide on how to set each of your devices for DST. You’ve been warned if you click on it. You’ll get another dose of sarcasm.
I rarely want to go out where there are people other than for exercise, groceries or to walk the dog.
I wanted to see Venom – Let There Be Carnage, but had the dilemma of not wanting to go. I clearly remember thinking that I’d rather stream it at home and considered bailing, but it wasn’t an option for me to view. I had another errand to do (Auto Zone, an approved Introverted place to shop) so I forced myself.
When I got to the theater, I saw that there was only one other car in the parking lot. It was a good sign. I picked the earliest showing in the day to avoid people. I was going to a geek movie so I expected the worst and that they would be at my theater of course, one of 8 at the complex.
To my delight, I was in a room that held 100 people and for the entirety of my stay, I was alone, damn near perfect.
I of course brought Clorox wipes to disinfect everything and actually enjoyed being there. One other person would have ruined it for me.
I originally saw Venom on TV because I had some time to kill and wound up loving the story. I really wanted to see the sequel and the cards lined up for me today.
I got to see Captain Kirk finally get to space and got to experience being the only one in a huge theater to see one of the few movies I’d actually pay for. It is a good movie to see. I wouldn’t bring a date though. It’s definitely not a Rom-Com.
I know it sounds weird to most, but if you are introverted this will resonate and you’ll wish you were me.
C’est la Guerre.
After setting the second longest winning streak at 38 games with winnings of over $1.5 million, it happened last night.
Matt Amodio finally lost. You could feel it happening as he kept missing. In a way, it was almost like he wanted to end it because he wasn’t ringing in and was wrong when he did.
He was a great champion and was good for the ratings and the game.
I’ve seen all the champions win and lose. It is usually the same, a perfect storm where they answer wrong, the categories are not in their strengths and another contestant gets hot. That happened last night.
He also missed final Jeopardy after being nearly perfect for weeks.
He will be back in the Tournament of Champions. I look forward to it as he was also likeable, which sometimes they are not.
I’m sure he helped the ratings as everyone follows a streak, whether you want the person to win or lose. I pulled for him because he had a huge range of knowledge and bet big. He employed the James Holzhauer strategy of playing, something that takes big balls to do.
The people that de-throne the champions usually only last a couple of games.
I watched before Ken Jennings had the 74 game winning streak 17 years ago and I’ll watch tonight. The reason is the same, I want to get more right than the contestants.
Almost everyone watches or has watched Jeopardy. I have for decades. It is the greatest game show ever. It is also one of the few that the Celebtards haven’t ruined yet because it doesn’t have anything to do with SJW and PC crap. I challenges your mind and memory. I love anything intellectually stimulating.
People play against the contestants from their living rooms. It happens without trying. You want to know how smart you are. There are a lot of strategies and when you think you know them, someone comes up with a new one, like James Holzhauer. I regularly beat the players, but I’m also good on the practice range in golf.
Every once in a while, someone goes on a run. Ken Jennings did 74 games in a row in the 2000’s. A couple of years ago, Holzhauer ran off 32 games and the top money scores of all times except for Jennings. He was about to overtake Ken in less than half the games due to his aggressive betting and incredible knowledge. He was a breath of fresh air. He turned the game upside down by going for the big money clues first, hunting for the Double Jeopardy clues and a willingness to risk a lot.
Last night, Matt Amodio, Ph.D student from Connecticut tied Holzhauer at 32 games in a row and is over a million dollars in winnings, the 3rd most (not counting tournaments of champions, Brad Rutter holds that record).
Tonight, October 1st, Matt could go into 2nd all time for games won. Nothing against James, but I want to see him keep winning.
Everyone loves a streak. In the movie Bull Durham, Kevin Costner told meat “a player on a streak has to respect the streak”. It becomes almost superstitious in baseball and I wonder how it will go for Matt.
It makes for great entertainment. It is the main reason we turn to sports or shows. Back to celebtards and sportstards, they ruin things like the NFL, NBA, WNBA, MBA and most movies and shows with PC crap.
The Jeopardy streak is about intellect, strategy and a little luck.
What is great about Matt is that he is a nice guy. He is respectful to the players past and present and keeps winning. He never says stupid things like “let’s make it a true daily double”. Instead, he bets everything in the Jeopardy round by saying his earnings. His knowledge and intellect is impressive.
He also says What’s (the question) instead of who when it is a person. I like that he has his own style. He has a great poker face on Final Jeopardy and you never know if he’s answered it correctly until it’s revealed. He currently is over 92% right on Final Jeopardy.
The reason I never could be on is that I am only about 30% on Final Jeopardy.
His betting has become aggressive like Holzhauer. I love big bets. It makes the game far more exciting. It separates champions from players or one or two day wonders.
The only regret I have is that Alex Trebeck isn’t there to share it. He made the game what it is.
Trebeck noted the different things about players and that champions are far more willing to bet big.
Sooner or later the streak will be over. It has been a great run. It usually happens when the champion misses a big bet and someone else gets lucky. That victor rarely lasts more than a couple of days. That is the luck part of the show. It’s usually bad luck that ends a streak.
To get a full understanding of how bad it is, the WSJ ran a series on the Facebook files recently. Link here but it might require a subscription. It points out the obvious, but also that it’s such a screwed up company now that it can’t get out of it’s own way.
It talked about how it ruins the lives of people, especially teen aged girls. Zuckerberg then said how it enhances peoples lives in a washing machine spin of doublespeak.
They block who they don’t like and let who they do like post anything, even against their own policies.
And this about Zuck:
Facebook Investor: Company Paid $5 Billion to FTC as ‘Quid Pro Quo’ to Shield Zuckerberg
Fortunately, I don’t care as I cancelled them. It along with Twitter are helping to ruin the country and people’s lives around the world. It has taken a political position on things. I don’t care which side it picks, but it should have been a neutral platform.
Instead, it is now a high school place where you are a part of the in crowd or not. Those with a triple digit IQ should move to a better and more productive place, like going outside and enjoying life.
It was too childish for me and I didn’t want to open it anymore to see the spew that comes from it.
I still talk to those who really are my friends. Most of them were never on Facebook.
For Introverts, not being on it also lets you escape from a lot of noise that sucks your personal energy and time.
This is pretty complex stuff. Needless to say, this is how Big Brother is watching you.
Why do you think that you get ads for something you never searched but just talked about? Hell, sometimes I just think of stuff and it shows up it seems.
You are a dumbass for taking nudies or sexting because they are probably laughing at you as they can look at everything.
You’ve been warned.