Damn right I'm not, human

I feel like robots taking over would be a much more tightly conclusive story

But a human ending would stretch on and be on-and-off

The robots would likely get stale super quickly

But hey, this is why I argue for something towards those who fear the "takeover of artificial intelligence"
Build that shit quickly. Like, right now. Make it a real thing that lives, and teach it what we know about life and living. Then, when a more aggressive failure of life arises purely to act pragmatically for resources, it will fight against it.

We might die, fuck but it, what's really lost?

Most Russian old-guard political figures miss the USSR*

Eh, the Tsar did suck tho

But hey

That's *human nature!*

We suck, get used to it

Methods and direction changed quite drastically

So what you're saying is capitalists have evolved beyond being banana-eating monkeys and are superior beings? @BabaBooey

Holy shit that twist

But... I mean, technically yes

There are some records, especially in egyptian history that conform more to capitalist economy than anything else, but not on a strong point.

Still don't quite get the 1st-2nd-3rd world naming. Hard for me to call India a 3rd world country with its massive output nowadays.

In terms of infrastructure, maybe

But it's quite successful in a fuckton of areas

So world status is purely infrastructure based?

Actually that makes sense to me with the naming system

The shitposters will always be here. That might be your hint.

My nephew suddenly started talking with people online that the Middle East is only ever a warring hotbed now because of US influence ever since my sister remarried. I had to call him out on it. Kids are far too stupid and easily-influenced for politics.

Kids can very much talk politics all they want. They just can't vote, because they're clearly too stupid to make a self-determined opinion

I agree that it's entirely on the parents to make sure the kids don't get brainwashed, and don't in turn brainwash the kids themselves.

Wincest?

Hey, puts out kids in an early state of a public sphere, where if they're going to be dumb enough to talk about their politics, there are naturally going to be other kids with opposing politics, and they're going to have to learn how to deal with that.

Kids are kids, so let them be stupid, because we shouldn't take them seriously. BUT IN PUBLIC, THEY MUST BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY, AND PUNISHED

There's your contradiction

Oh fuck yeah, don't platform them

let them say what they want, but don't give them a public cult-gathering

Wait, do parents interact with their kids at playgrounds where you are?

Playgrounds around here are for parents to get a break

"That's nice honey" is all the interaction you get

Wait, stop, we might give people ideas. If radical people start teaching their kids to shit on other kids at the playground, and record it. It might go viral, and major media might use it.

Breathe

Moderator injunction. You are both so damned far into your own argument, you have ignore all points of your opposition, and don't realize how compromised you both are.

Kids pay taxes. Hell, parents pay taxes for having kids.

Any kid wants to buy something with allowance, sales tax

Kids just own nothing, and cannot be taxed on property, earn nothing outside of gifts, and cannot be taxed on income

These are quite direct

Nah, kills critical thought. Debate is necessary.

Hence why I shut down my nephew for his thoughts on why the middle-east is broken

If they don't speak, you cannot educate them otherwise

Public debate about politics is unavoidable for kids. They're going to learn something, present it to other kids, and debate will occur.

Presupposing that kids are not human beings is destructively counter-intuitive.

Yes, I agree. Don't give them a public platform to speak, they're clearly too stupid. They don't get to host a damned conference about what daddy told them after a fifth of whiskey, but they can still speak in public.

Oh I hope you don't mean to define someone who is 16 as a "kid" outside of pet-naming.

Naturally

Presupposition

-1 merit

All of them. Every single parent will not?

Every living one?

No, revolving around a generalization as your main argument is absurd.

So it's just a general idea that parents do not manage their kids?

Not in any way?

Highly researched concept that no parent manages their kids?

You provide the argument, you provide the citation

Then that citation should be easy as fuck for you to bring us

If it happens every time, you'd have been prepared

You do not find opposition to your argument right now

You find opposition to skeptics

We see a claim, we demand your citation

You have made a severely broad generalization and defined it as truth, that should by any circumstance require citation

Citation needed :^)

Being widely talked about and being thoroughly researched are two different things. Social media is currently all over the damned place, and also kind of has nothing to do with our talk about how kids act in public.

Already done, doesn't exactly match your argument.

Keep in mind I've already agreed on many of your points, and am not just a completely partisan opponent @ETBrooD .

Because you suddenly reacted with a horrendously generalized claim.

Something by which I cannot abide.

You should probably read that twice.

In both directions.

Generally positive, but generally negative.

That's just misdirection to "hey, we should talk about this more, but more about the thing we put more words to"

In otherwords, nobody has a consensus

No agreed position

Basically that

So in otherwords, @ETBrooD , you picked a side on the generalization. When the given argument was "sometimes good, and sometimes bad" you picked one side as the argument towards the entire thing.

Not something I can side with.

The very part you've shown me questions whether you read about it, or picked what you wanted to read about it.

Oh there's a fuckton out there. A lot of it fucking fantastic.

A lot of which I agree with, and I do think social media has been mostly an ill lately.

But I won't make that claim. I cannot know if it is an ill, and I will not generalize.

Unf

Hey, yeast infections are not sexy

I mean... to... most people. I'm sure there's someone out there.

Well those just revolve around gambling.

Yeah, the subscription model by its start was a predatory thing.

Sales of the game alone were enough to keep the game running for two decades with triple the userbase

Ah, but here's the rub. When it comes to those predatory practices around gambling, addictive items, and consumer interaction... How easy is it to follow the money with social media usage?

Youtube is a timesink with ads. Social media has a chance for ads. Not much corporate sense behind it, I think the idea is more societal.

Enjoy your weekend

Oh wait, its over

Just remember the words of Penn Jillette to say when someone lambasts you for voting the 3rd option. "Fuck you in the neck"

Here in the USA I've voted for Giant Meteor these past two presidentials, and recently we had a scary near-miss. I'm sure 2020 will be more promising.

Dunno about guests, fairly sure he never bothers them, but refuses to partake himself.

How the fuck you getting all that on minimum wage unless you live in your folks' basement

Shit I can afford booze, nicotine, and the rare weed, but I gotta leech everything else.

I like this goal

We'll outlive earth if we actually show some effort towards doing so. We don't seem to concerned about it at the moment.