No more presidents requires either 1) enough representation to call a Constitutional convention to change Art. II 2) enough grassroots support to circumvent the Constitution entirely. My aversion to power vacuums and general assessment of the populace pushes me towards 1, but in either case you’re right that it won’t be easy. And in either case it will be slooow. Part of that is going to have to be supporting Dems as the lesser evil when their support dwarfs that of the radical change makers, to practically minimize opposition to radical change.

2 years is, unfortunately, a small period of time on the scale we’re talking about. There may be methods to sway a plurality of voters, but until we reliably secure those methods, voting for someone who stomachs a little genocide might be the best choice against an alternative that yearns for a lot of genocide. I didn’t vote for Biden or Harris because I liked them. I did it because the alternative which was poised to win was much more enthusiastic on that front. When you’re in the minority, you don’t vote for who you wish would represent you, you vote for the easier enemy to fight.

It won’t be easy, but the easiest path has the shortest obstacles.

Very fun idea, I’d like that. Counterpoint: how do we accomplish that?

And they will fly on a plane to do it

I like the Doctor Who “The moon is a giant egg” take

It may have been bomb-sniffing dogs now that I think of it 😉

Similarly, they did basically the same thing on 9/11 for dogs trained to find survivors when they weren’t finding many.

I’ve gotten in the habit of being wrong occasionally on purpose so my wife is less frustrated. Kinda like how drug dog handlers will plant the occasional drug if it’s been too long without a bust, so the dogs don’t get depressed.

EDIT: Not on people. That’s a totally separate thing. I’m talking about officers posing as suspects. Probably thinking of bombs anyway.

That’s why I can’t help but scoff when people say “It’s not real artificial intelligence, it’s just a stochastic parrot”. Like my dude, have you ever interacted with the average person?

That’s not what “dense” means to me. Maybe it’s just my mathematician bias, but I don’t consider a text where less than 50% of the words are precise and non-trivially functional to be “dense”.

I don’t want anything to do with K-Smog ever since the whole Batboy thing.

Curtains for Zoosha?

Also specified “dense scientific text”.

I’d say more “select from” than “churn out”. It’s not about generating a hypothesis, it’s about having a collection of hypotheses and deciding which should be your default until additional evidence is provided.

Hanlon’s razor says “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity”, and “adequately” is pulling at least as much weight as “never”. If stupidity becomes a less adequate explanation, nothing stops you from considering malice as an alternative.

People use things wrong all the time, sometimes the vast majority of the time (e.g. “literally”). Just because people use a concept pseudologically doesn’t make it intrinsically pseudological.

But razors aren’t supposed to be logic in the first place. They’re not objective analytical tools to arrive at a conclusion, because they weren’t designed to be. They’re framing tools to help establish an initial hypothesis.

Occam’s razor doesn’t claim that the simplest explanation is true, it merely says it’s the most practical assumption, all else being equal. If additional data provides more support for a more complicated explanation, Occam’s really doesn’t require you to cling to the simpler one.

Similarly Hanlon’s razor doesn’t claim that stupidity is universally a better explanation than malice, only that is the most practical assumption, all else being equal. It does not require you to ignore patterns of behavior that shift the likelihood toward malice.

I also tend to look for a thicker cut, since you can cook it more gradually to develop a good texture throughout without overcooking, and still develop a good crust.

I dunno, that sounds like a fast track to being the subject of a murder mystery. I think I’m good.

You’ve never heard of the Trans Siberian Railroad Orchestra?

Talk about diminishing returns

So Jesus was canonically into foot stuff and vore. Cool, cool.

Google “ferengi rule 34”

Totally replaced by having an induction stove. Regular kettle boils in like 2 minutes, never really use the electric kettle anymore.