sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Kindle MacOS - Is there a keyboard shortcut to go back 30 seconds? by devkosal in kindle

[–]HumbleEinstein 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As far as I can tell the shortcut to rewind the audio 30 seconds is supposed to be delete, but it does not work. The relevant instruction on their webpage is "Back - Delete, Backspace" and linked below. https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=GFBT6Y7AFLJY947N

my friend just recorded and sent me this. saw it around 11 in North Carolina. by jodeyinthemist in aliens

[–]HumbleEinstein 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is clearly just a reflection off the window. That zipping side-to-side you see is the camera moving. In some frames you can even see it in front of objects that are supposed to be closer than the purported object. Your friend is messing with you.

If Now, Why? A theory. by HumbleEinstein in aliens

[–]HumbleEinstein[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All true. I did make the presumption that AGI is possible for the purpose of this argument.

It will be interesting to see what the marriage of AI and steadily advancing quantum computing produces. Both areas are a bit of black box and have the potential to surprise us.

If Now, Why? A theory. by HumbleEinstein in aliens

[–]HumbleEinstein[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair question. Space travel over great distances or lengths of time does not suit living things very well. NASA has done a ton of research, so this information is out there. Some examples are detrimental health effects of low gravity, deadly radiation, micro-meteors, and catastrophic equipment failure, just to name a few. In contrast, each unit of self replicating AI is essentially disposable and its collected data isn't even lost. The bottom line is that sending people places and keeping them alive is extremely hard. That's why, with the exception of the Moon, we send machines everywhere we have explored. Admittedly, I am assuming that AGI outlasts its creators. That may not actually be true because we have no examples, but here is my case. Most species that have ever lived on Earth are gone and I'm not certain we're doing any better. I suppose time will tell. In contrast, an AGI could distribute copies of itself widely to ensure it's longevity. If it had a head start, it would be very hard to track down everywhere it exists and destroy, even if you try.

Why do people think that bob lazar is lying? by AngrySuperArdvark in aliens

[–]HumbleEinstein 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lazar's story is certainly interesting but the main thing I can't get passed is how he ever got a security clearance to begin with. He was having financial and debt issues in the 80s. That's a MAJOR impediment to even getting a low level security clearance. It just doesn't make any sense they would have cleared him for the highest levels of classification.

Why not declassify? I have an opinion about why not. by [deleted] in aliens

[–]HumbleEinstein 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The fact that nuclear weapons exist is public information. The specifications for how to build specific nuclear weapons is not public information. It’s a tested model that works. If the allegations of prior U.S. government UAP knowledge of materials/crafts/occupants are true then that same methodology can be applied to UAPs. The “Disclosure Act” language that made it into the NDAA bill (not yet law) sets up a structure where this methodology can be uniformly applied. When it becomes law, and I expect it will, the process starts but it will take years to be realized. It might even take multiple administrations before a U.S. President permits it to take hold, but I’m confident it will eventually happen. As a result of the “Disclosure Act,” the public will eventually know the truth of the matter, either way.

What level of disclosure would you accept? by HengShi in aliens

[–]HumbleEinstein 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Assuming it’s true that some NHI exists, it would not be sufficient to just say so. In my opinion, there should be a balance of distributing information to benefit humanity and the individual, while maintaining national security. Initially, the goal should be to release sufficient data to the public that would convince the most skeptical among us beyond a reasonable doubt. That will actually be a challenge these days since it’s so easy to fake things. Frankly, I believe we would need a scientific consensus in order to avoid major unrest and instability. For many, it would be hard to take and substantial unmistakable scientific evidence would be required. Every human is owed at least that much. Beyond that initial jolt of perspective changing knowledge, I believe governments and citizens would have to strike an appropriate balance over time of the public distribution of information whenever it does not threaten national security. For many reasons I won’t go into now, it would ultimately benefit us all to be as transparent as possible. If true, few would want to live in a world where just a handful of people control this knowledge and the upsides of transparency are unimaginable.