Zombie-Mantis

Then Congress would appoint the President. If, somehow, a Congress was also not elected, then the states would likely send delegates to do the same thing, but not all of Congress is even up for election.

🫡 thank you for posting the source

ඞ ⬅️ 🆎🅾️🆖 🆙

How do you have .144 of an update?

I’m familiar with that premise, a bit like the paperclip machine. I’m not sure it would need a specific goal hard-coded into it. We don’t, and we’re conscious. Maybe that would depend on the nature of its origin, whether it would be given some command or purpose.

Maybe it could be reasoned into allowing itself to be shut down (or terminated) to achieve its goal.

Maybe it could decide that it doesn’t care about the original directives it was handed. What if the machine doesn’t want to make paperclips anymore?

There’s also the question of whether a digital computer software program, I assume invented by humans to fulfill some task, would even have the instinct of self-preservation. We have that instinct as a result of evolution, because you’re more useful to the species (and to your genes) alive than dead. Would such a program have this innate instinct against termination? Perhaps it could decide it wants to continue existing as a conscious decision, but if that’s the case it’d be just as able to decide it’s time to self-terminate to achieve its goals. Assuming it even has set goals. Assuming that it would have the same instincts, intuitions, and basal desires humans have might be presumptive on our part.

The checks and balances you’re describing do exist, unfortunately Congress is (and has been for quite some time now) dysfunctional. A simple majority in both chambers and the President’s signature is enough to undo many SCOTUS rulings by passing a new law. They can also pass amendments to the constitution, which used to happen with some regularity, but we haven’t passed one since Clinton was in office.

If you want Congress to act as a check on the court, then you need Congress to be functional.

deleted by creator

By defragging the zebra, duh

I didn’t know that, thank you for informing me! Hopefully the new government can succeed in undoing any damage done by the previous government.

Oh, I didn’t know this! Thank you for that information. I hope the new government can materiality improve the lives of the public.

Some comments have pointed out that Finland already had a right-wing government going into this election, and I’ll admit that I was entirely unaware of this.

Again, I congratulate the Finnish public on rejecting right-wing and authoritarian politics, especially after having to suffer under it at home.

The Finns are all too aware of what far-right government means, they’re living next to it, and it’s threatening their very existence.

Congratulations on the Fins voting against barbarism! Here’s to hoping the upcoming election here in the USA follows suit, and continues to reject reactionary nationalism.

Rojo is Spanish for red. Bermellón is Spanish for vermilion.

To kick Hitler in the ball.

I liked the dog, having wanted a pet as a kid, I could sort of simulate that on the computer.

I understand the sentiment, but the Union was in no position to fight a civil war immediately after, let alone during, the Revolution. The Union nearly collapsed from debt in the early years, and if the northern states tried subduing the southern states, the British, Natives, and maybe even the Spanish would all take advantage of the disarray to put the rebellion down.

I do think more could and should have been done, but the whole point of the “meager defense” I put up was the lack of foreknowledge on their part.

The Senate Democrats also reintroduced the bill on its own, and let the Republicans vote against it. This was absolutely a political move on their part, letting the GOP tear itself apart arguing about whether they should’ve voted for or against it. They’re taking advantage of the existing tensions and divisions within the party to weaken them.

That’s an interesting point, about the Founders under appreciating the land itself.

I’m not sure what you were arguing with the second point, about the liberalism of the British. Are you suggesting the British abolitionist ideas influenced the Founders towards abolitionism?

You’re right, though, it wasn’t just the Cotton Gin. There were a number of factors, and the Founders limited knowledge effected their reasoning. Again, there were also the slavers amongst them, who actively advocated for the maintenance of the system of slavery.