Do people seriously conciously fantasize about taking part in erotic acts with real people (especially ones they have feelings for)?
Yes.
I kinda get the disrespect perspective, maybe. I felt that a little as a teen. But then I thought it probably wasn't respectful treating my crush in my mind like a sort of sexless statue or object rather than a real human being that I was in love with and wanted to have sex with.
Because they're also rich. Laws are for the poors.
I feel like maybe research on medical implants like this should be done by the state.
GOG is good too.
It would not need to be trained on CP. It would just need to know what human bodies can look like and what sex is.
AIs usually try not to allow certain content to be produced, but it seems people are always finding ways to work around those safeguards.
Depends. Are you a Louisiana Republican legislator?
Also mind that soon these new cars will be used cars with the same bullshit.
It is honestly impressive that with (presumably) only hard work, an education, a lifetime of business experience, and the kindness of strangers, he was able to work his way up to 6.4% of his goal.
A regular Ozymandias, that one.
What do you mean it's only IPAs here?
Why there's also Double IPAs, triple IPAs, quad IPAs, Imperial IPAs, every kind of fruit-infused IPAs, hazy IPAs, seasonal IPAs, limited edition IPAs, New England style IPA, West Coast Style IPAs, wheat IPAs, rye IPAs, oat IPAs, Session IPAs, red IPAs, and non-alcoholic IPAs.
And if none of that appeals to you we also have a limited edition seasonal dry-hopped pils that according to the menu tastes like an IPA.
If it's a luxury, isn't it almost by definition "something you can live without?"
Stock market? The thing where you buy tiny fractional ownership of of a company, too small to influence it, then try to sell that legal construct for a little more to someone else later? Why would you need that at all?
This is a great idea I think, but part of the problem with science versus programming is that they're just very different social environments, so the expectations, norms, and demands on each are very different.
Dependent down a little bit more, most research is done by people with phds or other advanced degrees (or pursuing them) in an academic job, and one of the conditions of attaining or maintaining that job is publishing. And these are the same people doing the peer reviews.
I think what this creates, even aside from the overwhelming volume and complexity of work, is a certain amount of grace amongst academics. That is, I think a fair number of peer reviewers are not only failing to rigorously grapple with the material that they review, but because of the small social mileux and shared incentives, they are incentivized to not be very rigorous in many cases.
Not saying peer review is without value, but how harshly would you want to challenge or critique the work of someone whom you may work alongside or under in the future?