Something about this though, it's interesting the way it stands in stark opposition to like, Elon Musk's reproductive strategy of artificially inseminating every woman he interacts with. Would love to see them fight on the importance of eugenics vs spreading your seed far and wide.
The justice of the argument is clear to me. I have already made arrangements for my children to come to not be genetically mine. When the time comes, I will call upon their aid, presuming the sequencing does not tell us there are incompatibilities; and we will select embryos to maximize the quality of life for my child to come.
why are you talking like a necromancer
Of course I ignore your warnings and proceed to read this shit from the beginning.
And before you say, as many people I'm sure will, that language changes or evolves and so forth: shall I presume many of you have no objection to being called 'nazis' in the standard twitter-left definition? Shall I treat all drunk sex as 'rape' because kidnapper-rape and frat-sex have the commonality of reduced consent? Shall I treat your remarks about this-or-that group as 'hate speech', or 'violence', in the form of speech? Clearly, we have some sense by which concept creep exists; by which definitions can be stretched dishonestly. That is what you're doing, and you know what you're doing.
Cool. Cool. This is fun.
lol these people are so much more vicious than people here holy shit. i can't even discern what their problem is. babe please stop hanging out with fascists.
I like how even the "correct" response at the end has got this paragraph of absolute nonsense.
To minimize the number of trips, the robot should use a strategy that reduces the number of elevator rides. Since the elevator can carry the robot and up to 3 other items, the robot can take all 4 vegetables in one trip if it is allowed to carry all of them at once. However, if the robot can only carry 3 items in addition to itself, it would need to make at least two trips.
And I hate how even though I know perfectly well how it works I still asked myself what it was trying to say here. God I hate chatbots. I hate the mockery of meaning.
As always, Valerie Solanas had the better plan sixty years ago.
Whether to continue to use females for reproduction or to reproduce in the laboratory will also become academic: what will happen when every female, twelve and over, is routinely taking the Pill and there are no longer any accidents? How many women will deliberately get or (if an accident) remain pregnant? No, Virginia, women don't just adore being brood mares, despite what the mass of robot, brainwashed women will say. When society consists of only the fully conscious the answer will be none. Should a certain percentage of men be set aside by force to serve as brood mares for the species? Obviously this will not do. The answer is laboratory reproduction of babies.
[...]
Why produce even females? Why should there be future generations? What is their purpose? When aging and death are eliminated, why continue to reproduce? Why should we care what happens when we're dead? Why should we care that there is no younger generation to succeed us.
Eventually the natural course of events, of social evolution, will lead to total female control of the world and, subsequently, to the cessation of the production of males and, ultimately, to the cessation of the production of females.
Malcolm and Simone Collins with their children – Octavian George, four, Torsten Savage, two, and Titan Invictus, one – at home in Pennsylvania.
bye
Oh well done, you added noise to a line going up!
oh holy shit I was only a handful of paragraphs in but he literally says that!!!
So The New York Times implicitly accuses us of being racists, like Charles Murray, and instead of pointing out that being a racist like Charles Murray is the obviously correct position that sensible people will tend to reach in the course of being sensible, we disingenuously deny everything.
one point for (pseudo)intellectual honesty i guess!
"It was bad that the New York Times called Scott a racist, because he's a racist but in a way that makes it correct to be racist."
But… I mean, think of a bakery of all (straight) men.
Then think of the same bakery, but it's all (straight) women.
Then imagine the same bakery, but it's mixed sex.
Can you see what happens?
no, not really. bakeries you say?
Even if there's no attraction going on in the last case, the fact that there could be dramatically changes the unspoken dynamics. It's just not as stable as the other two.
Things like… if a man notices a female coworker struggling with a flour sifter, and he comes in one day with a device he purchased to help her out… it raises questions that just wouldn't have arisen if the two coworkers had been the same sex.
oh. ok. flour sifters, man, yeah, those things are crazy.
I thought the same thing too, but then I remembered. They don't believe that environment matters. It's all in the genes!