EnsignRedshirt [he/him]

This is the best answer. Billups is torn between his loyalty and affection for his home, and his desire to be a Starfleet engineer. His internal conflict is manifesting as his own insistence that these customs and traditions are binding, despite the fact that this is all very silly and no one seems to be taking it that seriously.

I didn’t mean it like that. I just meant that it’s accurate and something that continues to be a problem.

This isn’t new. Every job posting is always in a superposition of being real or not real until someone actually gets hired. Job postings are used as bait to get cheaper talent, as an implicit threat to existing employees that they might be replaced, as a way to gain negotiating leverage with internal candidates, etc. There are no rules about job postings, you can literally post any job with any salary and any requirements, of course they’re going to be abused by any number of bad actors.

Memes are reposts! That’s their defining characteristic! They become memes by being reposted! If they didn’t get reposted, they would not be memes!

Hard to believe that anyone involved in AI would stoop to plagiarism.

that’s just how the internet really works, Things come down, nothing lasts forever.

While this is true, I think a lot of people are surprised that this is the case. For a while, I think there was a sense that the internet was essentially a permanent record, with storage and bandwidth always getting cheaper and bigger, but the reality is that cheaper and bigger doesn’t mean free or unlimited, and so there would inevitably be a point where you couldn’t just store everything and have it available forever. It makes sense once you think about it, but then the question becomes about what gets saved vs what disappears, and why. That’s where there’s fertile ground for conspiracy theories and speculation.

There’s also a really interesting conversation to be had about what we ought to expect in terms of what data and content we do want to archive long-term, and then what kind of infrastructure is required to maintain that. This article is less illustrative of what China is or isn’t doing and more of the issue that we don’t have a clear set of parameters or any long-term precedent for digital content storage, which is exacerbated by the fact that most of the infrastructure is privately owned. Those owners have no real obligation to archive anything except to the extent that it maximizes their profits or shareholder value, which isn’t a great way to decide what does and doesn’t make it into the ‘record’ so to speak. Somewhere along the line, there will be a need and a demand for a more robust public effort to curate and archive internet content.

This is happening on every part of the internet. A lot of old content is disappearing for a variety of reasons. I’m guessing that this is one of those things where they take a phenomenon that is not unique to China and explain how it’s bad when it happens in China because China bad.

Basically fearmongering about China doing what the West has been doing for the last century and is still doing now. Debt-trap imperialism, loss of sovereignty, the crafty Chinese being schemey and underhanded, etc. The headline is all that really matters, these articles should be written by robots at this point.

Properly-designed tools with good data will absolutely be useful. What I like about this analogy with the talking dog and the braindead CEO is that it points out how people are looking at ChatGPT and Dall-E and going “cool, we can just fire everyone tomorrow” and no you most certainly can’t. These are impressive tools that are still not adequate replacements for human beings for most things. Even in the example of medical imaging, there’s no way any part of the medical establishment is going to allow for diagnosis without a doctor verifying every single case, for a variety of very good reasons.

There was a case recently of an Air Canada chatbot that gave bad information to a traveler about a discount/refund, which eventually resulted in the airline being forced to honor what the chatbot said, because of course they have to honor what it says. It’s the representative of the company, that’s what “customer service representative” means. If a customer can’t trust what the bot says, then the bot is useless. The function that the human serves still needs to be fulfilled, and a big part of that function is dealing with edge-cases that require some degree of human discretion. In other words, you can’t even replace customer service reps with “AI” tools because they are essentially talking dogs, and a talking dog can’t do that job.

Agreed that ‘artificial intelligence’ is a poor term, or at least a poor way to describe LLM. I get the impression that some people believe that the problem of intelligence has been solved, and it’s just a matter of refining the solutions and getting enough computing power, but the reality is that we don’t even have a theoretical framework for how to create actual intelligence aside from doing it the old fashioned way. These LLM/AI tools will be useful, and in some ways revolutionary, but they are not the singularity.

I’ve been looking for an appropriate analogy for the current AI hype and this sums it up perfectly.

lmao imagine how deeply unserious you’d have to be to suggest that decoupling from China is even possible, let alone feasible or desirable. You’d have to have the discussion in full clown makeup while riding a unicycle.

If things don’t turn around for him, he might have to lower himself to try to get votes from non-Republicans.

violent images

I hate to be the one to tell you this, Seattle Times, but this is fetish content.

Mashing the buttons over and over trying to get the high score.

The existence of time travel and the idea of a Temporal Cold War suggests that any given future is just one of many possible futures. The events in Discovery are canon, insofar as they did happen, but whether future Star Trek properties will take the Discovery future as a given is a more open question. Discovery was written very deliberately to avoid being constrained by canon, but that also means that the events are narratively very removed from the rest of the franchise.

My guess is that whoever ends up in charge of making the next chapter of Star Trek will want to establish their own timeline going forward for the same reason that the Discovery creators did, and they’ll largely ignore the easily-ignorable Discovery events, at least as relates to the far future. The alternative is either to set the next series in an even more distant future, which comes with its own issues, or setting it before the 31st century and having to write around a whole bunch of barely-established future canon that only applies to Discovery. I could be wrong, but it seems like the path of least resistance.

Ergolf Hitler

The actor of captain Picard

Do you honestly not recognize Sir Patrick Stewart? No shade, it’s just wild to think there would be people who don’t recognize him at all, given the length and breadth of his career.

In answer to your question, I can’t speak for Patric Stewart, but my guess is that he chose to play the scene that way because it’s likely that very few people in the Federation smoke, and that’s probably doubly true for people who spend most of their time on a spaceship. My guess would be that Stewart was trying to indicate to the audience that smoking would be somewhat of an anachronism in the 23rd century.

As the saying goes, philately will get you nowhere.

In philosophy, it’s called Pasta’s Wager.

I have nothing to add here other than that I’m impressed with both your in-universe rationale and TV production rationale. This is solid Daystrom work and I hope we get to see the Trek Voltron. Even if it’s not a literal anthropomorphic robot-ship, I think you’re onto something.