ChatGPT is an Open Source AI

And microchipping everyone in the military just wouldn't be cost-effective and it's not even necessary.
We have cruise missiles that can launch from New York and go through a football goal post in california.
We have satellite cameras that can read the price on a pizza box from outer space
So Elon musk has other problems right now like all his stocks are tanking after having purchased Twitter for money more than it's worth
America's disdain for science will eventually lead to our downfall as a world superpower

Yes, was that so hard? Why does Dude avoid answering a simple question. how much has sea level risen? 2.6 inches?

Yes, clearly the biggest concern of the US military is to be cost effective.

National Ocean Service says in 2014 sea level had risen 2.6 inches above the national average in 1993, and is steadily rising.

You said, 'we are not seeing sea level rise.' Would that be like watching the grass grow?

They're not going to spend money on things that are not necessary like the whole neuralink thing. There's just no need for it
People just have a superstitious fear of science. That's why people were saying the hadron collider was going to summon demons in all kinds of nonsense

Also we've already had this conversation but rising sea levels is not the only concern of climate change. Just maybe 30 years ago, tornadoes in December were a rare event. Now we get them every December. Rises in heat related deaths, crop failures due to drought etc

We were given many predictions from climate models, and Al Gore's movies and we have not seen them.

However, that is not to say that we have not seen sea level rise. Like you said it has risen 2.6 inches over a 21 year period. Also like you said if the sea level is 2.6 inches higher then storms will push the sea further inland during the most destructive storms.

Also, with this 2.6 inch rise we will also get more flooding.

Yes, you ignore what I say. I am not at all denying that things are getting weird, what I am saying is that the old climate change theory does not explain what we are seeing. The reason you model climate change to predict future events is this demonstrates you understand the factors and how they interact. The fact that our models have been so clearly wrong shows that we don't understand. Nothing demonstrates how wrong these models were than Al Gore's first movie "Inconvenient Truth"

Why do you and Magenta make a huge deal over a 2.6 inch rise in sea level while at the same time ignoring a 1,000% increase in earthquakes?

Does not sound like a disdain for science in America to me?
I would have to go back and read the thread to understand your position but the fall of America is multi faceted and yes to some extent it is a planned demolition and not solely based on being against science.

Just did a quick Google search. I'm not finding anything about any increase in earthquake activity

My sister is begins to foam at the mouth when discussing these things as though she has rabbies. She just about lost it at a recent gathering when she was pushing the sorting of garbage into many different bags and someone else pointed out that a huge percent of the "recycle" garbage doesn't get recycled. She was well aware of these documentaries revealing what really happens but she felt we shouldn't talk about it because it gave people an excuse not to sort the garbage into a bunch of different bags? When people blatantly ignore the truth and demand that everyone else cover their eyes and ears and mouth from seeing, hearing or speaking the truth then you come across as an idiot.

The truth is very clear that fossil fuel puts greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, it has been very carefully measured every year.

The truth is also very clear that the doctrine of climate change is being pushed by flim flam artists flying around in private planes and pushing for a power grab. Angry teenagers, a waitress, a hollywood actor, these the ones who pushing this. That is a fact.

The truth is that these flim flam artists have been very very wrong in their apocalyptic prophesies and should be mocked.

The truth is that the cost of weather events is increasing. Now there are several factors, increased population, and inflation both play a role. But even if you take those into account the costs are still increasing at a high rate.

The truth is that they are ignoring earthquakes and volcanoes which are showing a much greater increase than anything else, but it doesn't fit their narrative, so they simply ignore it.

That is my point! The data is there and they are not reporting it. The USGS has a website that will let you search for earthquakes. Try searching for a time frame around 1950 or 1960 and compare it to the most recent decade.

From 1953 to 1963, 7,973 Earthquakes that were 2.5 or greater.

From 2013 to 2023 284,040 Earthquakes that were 2.5 or greater.

https://earthquake.usgs.gov

And yet no stories about this? Instead we have Al Gore hyperventilating over 2.6 inch rise in sea level.

Let's say there is indeed an increase in earthquake activity, it's kind of a red herring because climate change is still a thing

No, that is not science. Science looks at the observations, makes a hypothesis and then test the hypothesis. Our climate models are how we test the hypothesis and they have proven we don't understand what is going on. When that happens you go back to the drawing board which we have done several times. It is now time to ask "what are we missing". These earthquakes are obviously a huge factor that is not part of the equation. I am saying it is time to add these to the models to figure out what is going on.

Season 3 Episode 5 "Men Against Fire" in the TV series Black Mirror

Describes these super soldiers with brain implants, it explains many ways in which they would make a superior fighting force as well as a force that is much easier to be controlled and manipulated.

Fiction...
Also speaking of Elon musk

As they say "buckle up, buttercup" because things are about to get really wild.

Here is one industry where AI can really shine (55,000 layoffs so far with a whole lot more to follow)


Do you know what AI is really, really good at? Writing computer code.

If I were in the jury I would be inclined to say that AI's use of art is transformative and therefore they do not need permission of the copyright holders.


However, suppose they rule against AI and say you cannot train with copyrighted material? In that case you could easily shut down the art departments around the world. I can hardly believe any artist did not train on copyrighted material.