that's what most innovation is. the model T wasn't the first car. it was the car that was sufficiently refined to take over.

We have very different definitions of innovation.

Respondants:

Please, stop lying on the internet. It's not healthy. Stop making things up.

Source:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innovation

Making cars faster or cheaper isn't an "innovation". Making a flying car is innovation. Inventing the car is invention.

Systematic government-aided intellectual property theft, lax labor laws, low wages and low standards of living aren't innovative.

The word you are looking for is "invention". Innovation instead means exactly refining and improving existing things.

Your understanding of the situation is over a decade out of date. The Chinese are outright innovating at this point, they are well past the copy-paste stage. If you'd like to catch up, this is a good place to start:

https://www.youtube.com/@Wheelsboy/videos

And btw, they are making flying cars as well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBp96YGStIQ

Have you driven or ridden in a late model Chinese vehicle?

I assume you're being sarcastic, but it actually is.

That person has no idea or even care for what is or isn't ethical outside of other people maybe being upset about it and trying to stop them.

This is literal supervillian wire-heading type stuff. Poorly thought out ideas of a madman with no regard for the consequences; just vague claims about the definite super-good idea of direct brain state manipulation.

>What I wanted to do after dish brain pong, but never had the budget for, was using live animals as the computational substrate. Use the visual cortex of one as the input, send the neural spikes to a second animals frontal lobe for computation and finally send those signals to a third animals motor cortex to physically press buttons. It's a shame we never raised enough

It's amazing that someone would feel comfortable sharing this.

Who's "the enemy"? I surrender.

The philosophy and structure we rest on is much more precarious than our technologies.

Avoid becoming important enough to be targeted by any nation state

Getting a little suspicious that we might not actually get AGI.

Dude we dont even have GI

Well I do have GI issues but that’s a whole other problem

He he touche. I mean that there's nothing to suggest that the types of intelligence we have are all possible types. The human blend might be just part of the story, not general, specific.

1. No.

2. You cannot "control" superintelligent AI.

The implication is that they're pretending to be legitimate employees whereas they are actually exfiltrating IP from a hostile nation state. Seems valid.

You mean like the DOGE team?

I gathered from this article that Palantir apparently has complete transparency into - a "profile" of - every UK citizen.

This is glossed over and not really mentioned as an issue...

These psychedelic treatments always have substantial limitations, and this is no different;

1. Low volume cohort i.e. 40 participants per dose group

2. Industry sponsored study i.e. MindMed.

3. Think about it; how do you blind psychedelics? It's pretty obvious you're on one when you take it.

I recall an experiment where the control group was given Ritalin, and the participants had presumably tried neither Ritalin or the psychedelic.

I thought it was pretty cool, since the control group will still "feel" something and potentially think "oh this is it" but since the effects of stimulants like Ritalin have been more studied, the researchers can easily account for it.

Let me guess: Those limitations are ”unscientific” in this context, but when the article is about the dangers of cannabis, they are suddenly okay?

This isn't unscientific per se, it's just low quality science. No conclusions should be drawn. There are known treatments with extremely robust, good science.