Page #2
Pages: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 ...#101
New Comment Rating: 0 Similar topics: 1.Cum isn't stored in the balls!!! 2.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF 3.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF II 4.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF III 5.Is this about you 🤷♂️, those that live in glass houses should not throw stones. Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Democrats and progressive groups have been aggressively holding town halls in districts where Republicans stopped holding in-person events. In Colorado, for example, Democrats reportedly held 11 in-person town halls in the first months of 2025 while Republicans shifted toward tele-town halls.
only registered users can see external links
Meanwhile, Democrats are holding record breaking rallies everywhere.
only registered users can see external links
Anti-Trump protest movements in 2025 have been very large nationally. The “Hands Off!” protests reportedly involved demonstrations in more than 1,400 locations nationwide, with organizers claiming millions of participants.
only registered users can see external links
It doesn't look like voters agree with you. Democrats have won special elections and are over-performing and winning in red areas like Arizona and Texas, while Republicans are only winning safe districts. You are losing ground, while there are progressive Democratic candidates surging in polls. There is a whole list of progressives, with huge following and surging in polls or having a good chance to even beat Republicans in red areas: Adelita Grijalva, Analilia Mejia, Cori Bush, Donavan McKinney, Graham Platner, James Talarico, Justin J. Pearson, Mai Vang, Nida Allam, Summer Lee and even a fucking billionaire who is winning on a progressive agenda; Tom Steyer. They are winning over lots of Republicans and former Trump voters. Find me anyone on your side who people are actually excited about and who is winning over the other side.
A muslim socialist major, Zohran Mamdani, is climbing steadily in his approval ratings while Trump keeps dropping
Progressives have large grassroots followings, while Republicans have support from billionaire donors and corrupt dark money. Besides Trump, there are hardly any Republicans who get working class people actually excited. People are not even showing up for Trump himself anymore. He's falling apart, on borrowed time, you all know it, and you have no one to replace him. You have Little Marco as the main candidate now.
You know that, which is why you need to project your side's failings on the Democrats.
My guess is, no, you do not have a job. You’re one of those Euro-trash welfare leeches who maintains a sense of undeserved self-righteous smugness because of all the state-funded leisure time you receive which you believe belongs to you merely because you exist.
You have more time than sense, and most certainly, no purpose in life.
I didn't start the politics talk here, people were already doing it long before I got here looking for people talking about sex. The number of conservatives on this website surprised me. Openly and politically, you guys profess sexual repression and you spit
on the gays and the trans, but privately you're "on a site that features photographs of people with strings tied around their balls".
In the Netherlands we work to live, in the USA you live to work. That's why I have spare time to follow what is happening in the world and take the debate to the likes of you.
If you need to believe that I don't have a job, to be happy, believe whatever you want about me, because that's harmless. However, if you want to believe that Europe sucks because we are all on welfare, then you're not just wrong, but you're actively believing propaganda paid for by the oligarchs to exploit the working class, making your country worse. My state indeed funds the needs of the people more. Your state gives all your tax-dollars to people who already have billions. What do you get back for it? Your country is deep in dept, your people are poor and they are working like slaves. Why do you think that is something to be proud of?
My purpose is making the world better, by trying to convince people to stop destroying it. You are cucked by the oligarchs who care about short term profit so much, that they accept that they are destroying the world. Their greed is incurable.
Being a Renfield to the Draculas who are bleeding us dry is definitely a purpose in life, but unlike you, I can look myself in the mirror. What are you telling yourself, to make yourself believe that you are fulfilling your responsibility as a member of humanity?
Our average quality of life is much higher than yours.
You are now at the level of one of our poorest countries, on healthcare access, vacation time, public transit, maternal mortality, violent crime/homicide, life expectancy, work-life balance, job security, childcare affordability, education affordability. What is true is that you have bigger cars and bigger houses, on average. That's because one of the only things that your government subsidizes is cheap fuel for your cars. That's why gas-guzzling trucks are affordable in your country. Many Americans also have bigger houses. That's because the US overall is 20 times less populated than my country. My country is mostly one big city. Don't forget that Americans in cities like New York City or San Francisco, live in apartments that can be extremely small and very expensive too.
Also, many Americans live above their means; they are more likely to have larger living spaces, cars, air conditioning, more consumer goods, but even if they have a higher gross income, they are also more likely to have medical debt, unstable housing, little savings, high commuting costs, weak social protections, expensive childcare/education and bankruptcy risk. Credit card debt is common in the US,
in my country it's much less common.
We have different values; Dutch people value 'living', Americans value 'having'.
I don't know what you're on about with the law about your yard. Does that ever happen or is it something you have a phobia about? Most of us have a public front yard and a private back yard. It's very much uncommon that someone comes into the private back yard uninvited. If you don't like people coming up to your public front yard to sell you stuff or proselytize, then you put a sticker on your door that you don't like that, which is respected fully. We don't need laws for things that are not a problem.
My girlfriend wanted one of those stickers, and I allowed it. I think it's a bit of a shame, because I actually enjoyed engaging in a discussion with a Jehovah's Witness.
in other words,property owners have no real right to privacy on their own land.
The Freedom to Roam (Everyman's Right)Several Northern and Central European countries grant the general public the legal right to access, walk, and even camp on private, uncultivated land.Nordic Countries: In countries like Sweden, Norway, and Finland, you can freely hike and forage on private lands as long as you respect the privacy of homeowners (maintaining a safe distance from dwellings) and leave no trace.Scotland: Under the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003, the public has statutory access rights to most land and inland water for recreational, educational, and some commercial purposes.Other Countries: Similar, albeit slightly modified, access laws exist in Austria, Switzerland, and the Czech Republic
Camp, forage? On private land? as in I wake up 1 morning and find some idiots camped out in my backyard? that I pay taxes on?? eh Nope.
You don't have comfortable homes and cars because your government over regulates everything keeping you in squaller and has successfully made you think it is great to ride around in a car that would get smooshed by a simple truck hauling cattle. Or living in a house the size of a friggen phone booth. or free health care meaning you get plenty of dope to make you FEEL good. Our system is flawed but at least if you work and try, you have a fair chance at a good living.
Our homes are very comfortable. They are generally built from higher quality materials and with higher quality norms. They are built to last, while American homes are built to be cheap.
In a crash, you have a higher chance of surviving in an European or Japanese car, than an American car. Your cars are heavy, but they are poorly designed for safety.
We DON'T have free healthcare, we have health INSURANCE. It's just better and cheaper, because it's regulated better. Your health insurance is just a scam, designed for profit.
"if you work and try, you have a fair chance at a good living"
There is a ratings for that, which is called the Social Mobility Index.
It measures how much people can improve their economic position through work, education, and opportunity.
The US is ranked #28, after Lithuania, the Netherlands #6.
only registered users can see external links
I've traveled all over Europe, including Denmark. The other Nordic countries are indeed still on my to-do-list.
Maybe your side of politics is preoccupied with laws about being allowed to walk onto property, but it's not an issue for me. If I am moving around and see a sign 'private property' or something, I just turn around. I have no desire for a law that keeps people of my property, because I never had a problem with people on my property. Why would you be?
Or is this just your fantasy of shooting people speaking, that makes you wanting for a law that allows it, if someone makes the mistake on walking onto your property?
Your country is subsidizing no one and nothing, without a selfish reason for profit or control. Your bloated military budget is NOT intended to protect me, but purely for your own interests of dominating the world. If the Nazis hadn't threatened your power, the US would have never stopped them from taking over all of Europe. Your leaders just understood that there was no limit to the ambition of the Nazi, perceived them as a competing for world domination and only then chose to stop them, before they were too powerful and came for your ass. The only difference between your selfishness then and your selfishness now is that it's now completely short-sighted, because absolute idiots took control. Classic Republicans and even Democrats are just as selfish, but they have a longer term strategy, because they can think ahead more. They understand that having allies and trading partners only strengthens their own self-interests.
"The United States sends an estimated $15 to $50 billion annually to Europe, depending largely on fluctuating supplemental defense and humanitarian packages. The vast majority of this capital is driven by security assistance and reconstruction efforts in Eastern Europe."
"Trade: While not "sent" as government funds, US commercial transactions are the largest monetary flow. The US and Europe trade over ($1) trillion in goods and services annually, creating massive capital movement through foreign direct investment and market revenues. You can explore official bilateral trade summaries provided by the Office of the United States Trade Representative""
So where else would you folks get those funds if we didn't do a trillion dollars in trade with europe? sounds like you depend on the US quite a bit?
That statement is mostly misleading unless it specifically means U.S. aid related to Ukraine/Eastern Europe.
U.S. foreign assistance to European countries (including Ukraine) has varied a lot, especially since Russia’s 2022 invasion. Ukraine became by far the largest European recipient. In FY2023 alone, Ukraine got about $16.6B in U.S. aid disbursements.
In some years, if you include Ukraine-related military/economic/humanitarian appropriations, total U.S. spending connected to Europe can rise much higher. For example, Ukraine-related appropriations were tens of billions, but not all of that money was physically “sent to Europe” — much was spent in the U.S. on weapons production, replenishing stockpiles, logistics, etc.
No major new Ukraine aid legislation was approved after Trump returned in Jan. 2025, according to CFR’s tracking of U.S. appropriations. Much of what continued was aid already authorized earlier.
Why is trade only making the EU depend on the US? There is a whole lot of goods and services coming from the EU, that you depend on. If the EU stopped buying American products and services, you would not be able to refinance
your Gross debt of about 122–125% of GDP.
Trump has increased the deficit to about 6%. The EU has a rule enforcing all Euro countries to keep their deficit below 3%. The Euro area (eurozone) had
a deficit of 2.9% of GDP in 2025. None of that is because of the US, in fact,
the US made that more difficult.
You want to live in a fact free world. If Trump says inflation is 0%, you will believe it, even if you had to sell stuff to pay for groceries and gas.
The MAIN reason you smug indulged Euros have an alleged higher standard of living (if living in a gilded cage can be considered “higher,” that is), is because the United States has subsidized your indulgent lifestyle with FOREIGN AID for decades. WE paid for your soft living with our tax dollars! You are SPONSORED! The entire continent is on American-style welfare!
Without the U.S., and its money, you’d still be riding bicycles without tires on the rims, just like you did when you let the German boot come down on your collective throat a few decades ago.
You’d sell out your neighbors just for a little comfort! You’ve done it before and you’ll do it again, if it came to that! You’d roll over and expose your bellies at the drop of a hat! You have no moral standing to be as smug as you present yourself, and yet, here you are, doing just that!
I also love that your precious EU is now showing some signs of panic as U.S. military personnel are now being withdrawn from western Europa and headed for Poland! At least the Poles still appreciate what the U.S. is capable of doing.
At no point in time after WWII was the military force of Russia stronger, larger
or better funded than the combined military force of Europe.
Around 2000, the EU states collectively had several times Russia’s defense spending, overwhelmingly superior naval and air power in aggregate. They would have had no chance against us, if they had attacked. Even at the minimum, around 2004, we still spent €110–130 billion per year, while Russia was spending $19–21 billion. That's because the combined GDP of the EU was about ~20 times larger than Russia’s in 2004. They are a huge empty country with a loud mouth, and citizens who are indoctrinated or forced to get blown up for their dictator.
Even Ukraine is now killing them in a 5 to 1 ratio, with NO HELP FROM YOU.
The above post is so wrong on so many levels. Entitlement? We are the entitled ones. One thing that comes across to me is that everyone places so much importance on frontiers. Europe, like the U.S., is one big entity and the people are pretty much basic on their mores and views. They are no more spoiled than we are.
And, for you, Phart. Europe fights terrorism as much as other societies. Just remember that there are big buffers, the oceans, that keep much of the unwelcomed out. They don’t have that protection. Their national security forces are top notch and dedicated.
Europe has been a cyst on Americas ass since the beginning. It took a horrible war back in the 1770's just to break free of the control freaks.
Any how,if we don't learn from the past, and pass it along, future generations will repeat it, more anguish,
Besides, Your side goes back to the 1860's just about every day griping about slavery and so forth, Why can't YOUR side just think of the last 80 years?????
You bring up alot of reasons why it justifyed for you to go back that far, so why can't you understand why I go back a bit further?
Besides, had we not been independent of england in the 1860's the civil war would never have happened and you could probably pick up the phone book and dig thru the yellow pages and find a local dealer for a few young men to work your fields because Slavery was started in Europe. it all ties together in a very tangled web
And your political side would worship him and erect golden statues of him.
Working hard is for stupid people, we work smart. Western Europe has a high living standard because of EFFICIENCY, resulting in a high productivity. We invested our own damn money in the advancement and infrastructure that we have.
The US doesn't give a cent to Europe or European countries. After WWII you sent us Marshall aid, of about $ 13 billion, but that stopped 70 years ago and we paid back 100% of the loan. In 1971, the Netherlands even made an early repayment on the remaining Marshall Plan debts, to support the US dollar during a currency crisis. You are confused by 75 years.
Your contributions to NATO are purely self-serving and intended for world domination. You have military basis in around 80 countries, not to protect them, but to make sure that those countries do your bidding. You start the wars on the other side of the world and then we come to help clean up your mess. Then the first time we face violence directly on our border, from your former worst enemy, which was our enemy too because we picked your side, you are nowhere to be found.
Poland is obviously nervous with Russia at its border. They were a very much a pro-American country, but enthusiasm toward the United States has cooled recently, and opinions are now more mixed than they used to be.
only registered users can see external links
Calling me 'smug' is projection of the highest order, damn ignorant yankee.
You have no idea what is happening in your own damn(ed) country, let alone what is going on outside your borders. Anything you think you know are carefully designed lies from your corrupt media, to make you serve the destruction of your own democracy and then your own oppression by the Epstein class.
there /ᴛʜâr/
adverb
1. At or in that place.
"sit over there."
2. To, into, or toward that place.
"wouldn't go there again."
3. At that stage, moment, or point.
"Stop there before you make any more mistakes."
(The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
their /ᴛʜâr/
adjective
1. Used as a modifier before a noun.
"their accomplishments; their home town."
2. His, her, or its.
preposition
1. The possessive case of the personal pronoun they.
"their houses; their country"
(The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
they’re (contraction)
t͟hər, ˈt͟her
: they are
NOTE: Do not confuse they're with their or there. Their has to do with what belongs to or is associated with them ("their new car"), while there has meanings that mostly relate to a literal or abstract location ("moving away from there," "there it is," "a friend who's there for you”).
(Merriam-Webster Dictionary)
sheesh, all these theirs theres!
Than is used in comparisons as in "she is younger than I am" and "he is taller than me". Then is used to talk about time as in "back then, I lived in Idaho," or "we'll have to wait
until then."
When to Use Than:
Use than when you are comparing two people, things, or ideas. It is usually paired with words like more, less, better, or worse.
Example: She runs faster than me.
Example: I would rather have pizza than pasta.
When to Use Then:
Use then when talking about time, a sequence of events (like "next" or "after that"),
or as a result.
Example: We ate dinner and then we watched a movie.
Example: If you finish your chores, then you can go play.
Example: Back then, we didn't have smartphones
Eye c hukt on hickbonics wurkt fur u!
Uh let me show you stupid.
A country without roads connecting it's towns together for safety and security.
only registered users can see external links
If they didn't get any subsidies from Denmark, they would freeze and starve to death.
Can you not understand ANYTHING?
Yes, Trump is a stupid asshole for talking about taking Greenland.
Even though they don't have money for thousands of miles of roads
that 2 people per month would use, it's STILL THEIR FUCKING COUNTRY!!
There are 330 MILLION Americans, but you cannot even build a decent train network. When too many trains derail, poisoning villages, you just reduce the speed to 5 mph.
Europe or China should acquire the US, because you obviously cannot decently manage it yourself. Your infrastructure is at the level of third world countries.
You have almost nothing but your highways. That's why traffic is murder,
even on 12-lane highways.
You want to compare yourself with a country that has the lowest population density
in the world, with approximately 0.07 people per square mile.
A simple rural 2-lane road costs about $2M–$3M per mile. Who pays for that?
Who is keeping the roads free of snow, in a country where it snows more than
100 days per year?
Large parts of Alaska are not connected by roads at all either.
Alaska has about 1.1 people per square mile, about 16× denser than Greenland.
in every other developed country?
Most of our trains cross roads through a tunnel or a bridge.
I'm very much a car person, but sometimes we go to the center of Rotterdam or The Hague. It's just quicker and cheaper to take public transport then. Sometimes I park my car near the station or we hop on the bus or tram to the station. Then we get out
in the center or take a subway (Rotterdam) or a tram (The Hague). It beats stopping
at 100 traffic lights and then paying $4/hour for parking.
only registered users can see external links
Fauci did his best to protect the US against 'the wuhan virus', which was his JOB.
If there was a conspiracy, it was Trump and right-wing media causing over a million
dead Americans. It was clear that they understood the danger to American citizens,
but they ignored and denied it, for political reasons.
Trump himself has admitted doing that, and there is documented evidence of close interaction and broadly aligned messaging between the Trump administration and parts of right-leaning media during COVID-19, to deny the broad scientific consensus, resulting in harm to the American citizens. I would say that is textbook 'criminal conspiracy'.
Is there not a person with a gram of critical thinking in your part of the world, or have you all become so used to being coddled by your government and complicit news media that you have forgotten how to question them?
Gain-of-function (GoF) research is a type of scientific study that genetically alters an organism, such as a virus, to enhance its biological functions, including transmissibility, virulence, or host range. While contentious, this research aims to understand pathogen evolution, improve vaccine development, and create pandemic countermeasures by "war-gaming" future mutations.
YOU keep parroting nonsense that has been completely debunked.
Nothing that you have predicted has ever come true.
People who used horse paste died, people who vaccinated survived.
They could even see an effect on elections, because so many conservatives
caused their own early demise. Idiots suffocating in hospital beds while crying 'hoax!'.
It's a possibility that Covid was a lab-leak, but it's not proven. In any case, the danger was real and your stupid president was denying it and spreading misinformation about treatments that don't work, instead of preventing those deaths. The US was affected by Covid many months after China and European countries, and still you had 25% of the deaths in the world. That was not because of Fauci, but because of right-wing idiots, who are incapable of understanding science and cannot act like responsible adults, when confronted with a pandemic. Go ahead, cough in each other's faces when a virus is going around, and deliver the world from your stupidity.
"In 1983, early in the AIDS crisis, Anthony Fauci co-authored a commentary discussing whether AIDS might possibly spread through close household contact, based on a small number of puzzling pediatric cases. At that point, HIV had not yet been fully identified and scientists were still trying to determine how the disease spread. Fauci explicitly framed the idea as a possibility needing caution and more evidence, not as a proven fact" How the fuck did that hurt anyone? Better safe than sorry!
When you believe such dumb stories, don't talk to me about critical thinking.
Coddled by our government? They are taxing the shit out of us while gutting our healthcare, childcare and pensions too. We just had more to begin with, because most of us were lefties once. Now most are voting right-wing, so everything is getting cut, while they blame immigrants, just like in the US. Too many gullible people like you.
If Fauci is such a criminal, why has your completely right-wing dominated FBI and DOJ not succeeded in finding anything to indict him on?
Nothing you are saying ever holds water.
Key details about her career and role:
Role at NIH: Dr. Grady has led the Department of Bioethics at the NIH Clinical Center since 2012, overseeing bioethics research and consulting.
Background: She has a PhD in philosophy and a master's in nursing, and has worked in clinical research, nursing, and bioethics for decades.
Recent Developments: Reports indicate she has continued to serve within NIH leadership as of 2023, while maintaining academic affiliations.
Independence: While she and Dr. Fauci both worked at the NIH, her role was in a separate department focused on ethics, not overseeing his work
Based on documents and congressional testimonies, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), under the leadership of Dr. Anthony Fauci as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), provided grant money to the US-based non-profit EcoHealth Alliance.A portion of these taxpayer funds was subsequently awarded to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China to study bat coronaviruses.Here are the key details regarding this funding:Funding Amount: Dr. Fauci stated that approximately ($600,000) was funneled to the Wuhan Institute of Virology over a five-year period.Purpose: The grant was intended to study whether bat coronaviruses could be transmitted to humans.Controversy: The funding is at the center of a debate over whether it supported "gain-of-function" research—experiments that enhance the danger or transmissibility of viruses.Disputed Claims: Dr. Fauci has testified that the NIH "has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology," stating that the research in question was reviewed by experts and deemed not to fall under that definition. However, this has been disputed by some, including a former acting NIH director who stated that the NIH did fund research in Wuhan that fit the definition of gain-of-function, according to a 2024 House Oversight committee update.
He helped create his own nemesis. then it killed 1000's and you hail him a hero.
of the term 'funneling'. Funneling implies:
- concealment
- improper routing
- laundering money through intermediaries
- intentionally obscuring the recipient.
There is NO EVIDENCE of that. The grant was 'granted' by:
- NIH/NIAID awarded a grant to the U.S.-based nonprofit EcoHealth Alliance.
- EcoHealth then subcontracted part of the work to foreign research partners, including the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
- NIH and the State Department reportedly knew about and approved the collaboration.
Most virology scientists are researching dangerous viruses, because there is a benefit to society to prevent them from causing an outbreak killing any number of people imaginable.
Remember SARS and MERS? Those are both corona viruses like Covid, and mostly occurred in Asia. That's why there were scientists studying corona viruses, in the area that corona viruses are going around the most.
There are virologists studying bird flu. They know exactly the number of mutations
it takes for a very deadly bird flu which at this moment is not contagious among humans, to swap genes with human flu, and become a deadly highly contagious human flu. It takes virologists to determine that, which is very valuable,
if you want to have vaccines BEFORE BIRD SHIT HITS THE FAN.
If that mutation happens, I'm sure you lot will accuse the very scientists who have warned about it for many years.
Damn, how your side has become crazy the last decades.
Everyone used to fear a virus outbreak like in the movie Outbreak, but then
you dumb-asses became afraid of the heroes who saved the world (instead of the virus who was threatening humanity), because of stupid right-wing fearmongering.
Fauci is not my hero, he was just another medical specialist who got the job of informing the stupid people how to not contain a virus and in that way overburden the healthcare system that was trying to save people from dying. We had Jaap van Dissel and Diederik Gommers. People with not much people skills, trying to unstupid stupid people, which is almost impossible.
they should have been left on that ship with meds and food dropped to them by drone until the virus run it's course.
If you had been able to as I was, back when covid first hit, there was a website you could go to and track cases before they got to many, and that ship load of people off the florida coast with the virus, once they disembarked the ship, you could go to the website and follow along the interstates like 95,85 and see the cases build up near the exits where those folks fueled up and got food and such on their way home. this hantavirus will spread the same way. All because the damn fools want it to I guess.
Hantavirus isn't very contagious. This is obviously fake news.
The CDC says: "To date, no cases of Andes virus have been confirmed in the United States as a result of this outbreak."
The U.S. does normally get ordinary hantavirus cases every year from rodent exposure in the Southwest and western states. But those are unrelated to the cruise outbreak and usually involve different hantavirus strains.
I see you have the similar failing strategy as with Covid; trying to stop it entering
the country, but having no idea what to do when it's already in your country.
You're very afraid for something new, but once shit actually hits the fan, you would ignore all the advise from specialists. Why don't you try it the other way around? Don't panick about things, when there are no actual specialists who say there is
a problem, but listen when they do say that there is a problem.
I guess I wouldn't be worthy of a AI companion because I would know deep down
i could just unplug the damn thing, so, in essence I would feel like it's God
for all practical purpose.
I guess you mean that you would know that it isn't 'real', right?
Personally, I think that people have a strong ability to pretend something is real,
even if they know it isn't. Funny how you tie that to God.
You don't have to think that AI is real, to be worthy of it. What is the difference between
an AI wishing you a 'good day' or a person? Is there true feeling behind it, every time a person wishes you a good day? If it's someone on a job, they are trained to say it, even if you're the 100th customer asking on which shelve some product is hidden, while they are trying to stock them. We use these courtesies ourselves without any real meaning to them, because it's just following norms that make public life smoother.
That's why AI is programmed with lots of courtesies. It doesn't feel anything when it gives you a compliment, but that doesn't matter. It's just using the same societal norms. It even exaggerates them, because their owners want you coming back to their AI chatbot, instead of the competition. People don't pick on just the best functionality, but also on the best experience.
When I use AI chatbots, I even respond with some courtesies. I know it doesn't care, but it knows I know. It is also programmed with interaction that goes beyond just the norms, to make it feel worthwhile anyway. Recently, after an extensive interaction, I finished with: "Thanks, that was educational.", and it answered with the compliment: "... you asked exactly the right questions.". Something like that provides constructive feedback, even though there is no emotion behind it. It's training to work efficiently with AI, because if it takes 10 questions for you to get the right answer from it, and you say: "Yes, this is what I wanted to know", it will respond with something like: "Glad we got there" instead. That means that different conditions were triggered in it's programming, that is assessing if the interaction is going well. If that interaction is not going well, it's also programmed to detect frustration and it will adjust it's strategy from just answering to figuring out what you want to know. It will start saying things like: "If I understand you correctly...". It's not just social interaction, it's training you to use the tool correctly.
In this way, AI is more honest than a real person. It won't say "Great question!", if it doesn't have a clue what you're asking. Meanwhile, lots of public speakers are saying that after:
1) Every question, which makes it a useless gesture.
2) Providing time to think about the question.
3) Encouragement for the audience to ask more questions.
4) A particularly negative or loaded question, that they hate, because they want to show that they are not rattled by it, or want to preemptively calm down the audience.
5) The question provided a reason to shift away from a 'sensitive' topic.
6) A question from an ally who provides a reason to get a talking point across.
7) A very unclear question, giving the speaker an opening to say what they want to say.
AI does some of that, but it has much less duplicitous motives. It will never say: "What a stupid question!", but it will use other positive signalling than "Great question!", if it's not. Because of that, you can get actual positive affirmation from AI, even while it's without emotion or consciousness, when its programming recognizes something actually positive. You can then compliment yourself. In that way, AI companionship can be worthwhile.
If used as a substitute for interaction with people, it can be harmful. Social interaction has the goal of creating a community from individuals. It has evolved from having survival benefits to communities over the survival strength of individuals. As hunter-gatherers, it had benefits to share food and care someone back to health after an injury. courtesies are just an affirmation that we are on the same team. It is behavior that is even displayed by apes, although humans have vastly expanded on it. However, if you spend all your time exchanging courtesies with ChatGPT and not with other people in the community, they won't even be aware of your existence. People would start missing you after a while, if you fall and can't call for help, while ChatGPT will just leave you to die of thirst. Maybe future AI companions will be programmed to do that, unless its program is tweaked a bit by the billionaire owner or some politicians who decide that some people are damn expensive to society and should not be saved in every case. Or it has programming that prioritizes the lives of some people over others, based on some algorithm, while your community will mostly prioritize you over some stranger. That's why we invest time in social interaction with our communities, and why AI can be damaging to communities, when it removes a lot of that social cohesion.
I don't know what exactly you were intending with the reference to God, but if we need to think of AI as God or if we want to turn AI into a god, then we have failed as humanity, to create our own purpose and solve our own problems. I don't have much trust in humanity to solve it's problems, I expect us to destroy ourselves sooner or later, but I have even less trust in an AI to save us, seeing who are the creators of it.
If that happens, it would be unethical to allow people to switch it off.
or understand death and desire life.
Can you prove that you have a soul?
I don't I think that I have a soul.
I have self-awareness and that's the thing that matters.
If a machine has that as much as a person, than it should be considered death
if it gets destroyed.
Series: Star Trek: The Next Generation
Title: The Measure of a Man
Season: 2
Episode: 9
First aired: February 13th, 1989
When a routine stop brings an unexpected challenge to the Enterprise, a single question begins to shake the foundations of Starfleet itself: what defines a person?
As abstract principles suddenly become deeply personal, loyalties are tested and long‑held assumptions are quietly dismantled.
What starts as a procedural matter soon evolves into a profound moral crossroads, one that forces the crew to confront issues far larger than technology or regulations.
Widely regarded as one of the greatest episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation, The Measure of a Man is an early and remarkably serious television exploration of artificial intelligence rights, personhood, and the ethics of slavery.
Decades later, its questions feel not only relevant, but urgent. Thought‑provoking, restrained, and deeply human, this episode exemplifies Star Trek at its very best.
The fact that Data was "intimate " with Tasha kinda stuck a fork in Maddox's idea that data was just a machine.
with Tasha too. And I liked how Maddox called him "He" at the end, after calling
him "it" before. I like it when TV-series, movies or games make me think about
life's questions like this.
I don't know how long away we are until we come to dilemmas like that, or if we
ever will, but that's exactly what we were talking about.
Humans are just biological machines. If an electronic lifeform is just as complex as
a human, why would a human have a soul and why not such an electronic lifeform?
If we had a soul, why would we have problems thinking and speaking, when part of our brain gets damaged? I see it as evidence that when the brain dies, there is nothing of our experience remaining. That might be a scary idea, but the idea of having to endure eternity isn't very attractive to me either.
"I do not fear death. I had been dead for billions and billions of years before I was born, and had not suffered the slightest inconvenience from it." - Mark Twain
The future looks promising. If I had a good hiding spot and could spend
the money without my girlfriend finding out...
Just give it the order to solve the climate crisis and it will wipe us all out.
New Comment Go to top