kilroy69

The president of Harvard looks JUST like I would expect the president of Harvard to look like in this day an age.

I mentioned this before. I am not concerned at all. He is sabre rattling and this is not our fight. We are not needed there. This is not our sphere of influence. There is no power power vacuum. Venezuela is trying to push around it's tiny asss neighbor and take their land but the 2 countries surrounding them are not going to allow that to happen. Brazil and Columbia are not going to let Venezuela destabilize the region for a money grab. The colombians have battle hardened troops who have spent years fighting the FARC and Brazil is a regional superpower. Brazil alone could easily, easily smoke Venezuela but I almost assure you that power dynamics would not allow the Columbians to let Brazil do it all on their own. Maduro would be dead or in prison within a month of trying to annex Guyana.

How disgusting.

He is going to look great as a lion next year.

Maduro is trying for an old fashioned land grab. He is sure that if Russia can do it and that he can too. He has whipped his country into a frenzy and has them believing that A. they can vote on taking another country and that is just going to be acceptable to anyone other than the people who voted for it and B. he thinks that he is going to be able to toss around his bigger military against Guyana. He is wrong on both accounts. You can not vote to take over another country. If that were the fact we would own Canada right now. Annnnnnd while Guyana has no chance of defeating Venezuela in a straight up military battle they are not going to have to worry about it. Brazil is not going to allow Venezuela to destabilize the region. We do not hear anything about the Brazilian military they have the same active duty as Venezuela, puts in 2 percent of its GDP into its military, has 1.3 million troops in reserve to Venezuela's 8k and has 15 million people it could call up in a conscription. Brazil would fock up Venezuela and likely topple Maduro. There is ZERO chance he makes a move for Guyana. He is sabre rattling at best. At worst he is gonna get smoked by a Brazilian/Guyanan hit squad.

You act like he is the first person that we found out lied about a hate crime. That is not even close to being true.

Tell me that you can see this person and not fully believe they are mentally ill and I will call you a liar.

NYC will pass a law allowing for anyone to file a murder charge from any state. No matter where it happened it can be tried in NYC.

This is exactly how I feel. War sucks man and the truth of it is laos and cambodia were allowing weapons, supplies and troops to be funneled into vietnam via the ho chi min trail. Stopping them before they got there seems like a pretty good idea

That is what I came here to say. 22 times? Did the guy stop because his arm got tired?

Dude is a pos.

They literally were not invited to join the board at openAI and then are going to turn around and yell at the top of their lungs how they would not want to work at openAI. Timnit Gebru is delusional. She can not get a job so she started her own company. EARLIER THIS MONTH, OpenAI’s board abruptly fired its popular CEO, Sam Altman. The ouster shocked the tech world and rankled Altman’s loyal employees, the vast majority of whom threatened to quit unless their boss was reinstated. After a chaotic five-day exile, Altman got his old job back—with a reconfigured, all-male board overseeing him, led by ex-Salesforce CEO and former Twitter board chair Bret Taylor. The specifics of the boardroom overthrow attempt remain a mystery. Of those six, D’Angelo is the only one left standing. In addition to Taylor, the other new board member is former US Treasury secretary Larry Summers, a living emblem of American capitalism who notoriously said in 2005 that innate differences in the sexes may explain why fewer women succeed in STEM careers (he later apologized). While Altman, Brockman, and Sutskever all still work at OpenAI despite their absence from the board, Toner and McCauley—the two women who sat on the board—are now cut off from the company. As the artificial intelligence startup moves forward, the stark gender imbalance of its revamped board illustrates the precarious position of women in AI. “What this underscores is that there aren’t enough women in the mix to begin with,” says Margaret O’Mara, a University of Washington history professor and author of The Code: Silicon Valley and the Remaking of America. For O’Mara, the new board reflects Silicon Valley’s power structure, signaling that it’s “back to business” for the world’s most influential AI company—if back to business means a return to the Big Tech boys’ club. (Worth noting that when it was founded in 2015, OpenAI only had two board members: Altman and Elon Musk.) Prominent AI researcher Timnit Gebru, who was fired by Google in late 2020 over a dispute about a research paper involving critical analysis of large language models, has been floated in the media as a potential board candidate. She is, indeed, a leader in responsible AI; post-Google, she founded the Distributed AI Research Institute, which describes itself as a space where “AI is not inevitable, its harms are preventable.” If OpenAI wanted to signal that it is still committed to AI safety, Gebru would be a savvy choice. Also an impossible one: She does not want a seat on the board of directors. “It’s repulsive to me,” says Gebru. “I honestly think there’s more of a chance that I would go back to Google—I mean, they won’t have me and I won’t have them—than me going to OpenAI.” The lack of women in the AI field has been an issue for years; in 2018, WIRED estimated that only 12 percent of leading machine learning researchers were women. In 2020, the World Economic Forum found that only 26 percent of data and AI positions in the workforce are held by women. “AI is very imbalanced in terms of gender,” says Sasha Luccioni, an AI ethics researcher at HuggingFace. “It’s not a very welcoming field for women.” One of the areas where women are flourishing within the AI industry is in the world of ethics and safety, which Luccioni views as comparatively inclusive. She also sees it as significant that the ousted board members reportedly clashed with Altman over OpenAI’s mission. According to The New York Times, Toner and Altman had bickered over a research paper she published with coauthors in October that Altman interpreted as critical of the company. Luccioni believes that in addition to highlighting gender disparities, this incident also demonstrates how voices advocating for ethical considerations are getting hushed. “I don’t think they got fired because they’re women,” Luccioni says. “I think they got fired because they highlighted an issue.” (Technically, both women agreed to leave the board.) “It’s repulsive to me. I honestly think there’s more of a chance that I would go back to Google—I mean, they won’t have me and I won’t have them—than me going to OpenAI.” TIMNIT GEBRU, FOUNDER DISTRIBUTED AI RESEARCH INSTITUTE No matter what actually spurred the conflict at OpenAI, the way in which it was resolved, with Altman back at the helm and his dissenters out, has played into a narrative: Altman emerging as victor, flanked by loyalists and boosters. His board is now stocked with men eager to commercialize OpenAI’s products, not rein in its technological ambition. (One recent headline capturing this perspective: “AI Belongs to the Capitalists Now.”) Caution espoused by female leadership at least appears to have lost. O’Mara sees the all-male OpenAI board as a sign of a swinging cultural pendulum. Just as some Silicon Valley tech companies have been working to correct their woeful track records in diversity and consider their environmental footprints, others have recoiled against “wokism” in various forms, instead espousing hard-nosed beliefs about work culture. “It’s this sentiment around, ‘OK, we’re done being touchy-feely,’” she says. “Whether it’s Elon Musk’s ‘extremely hardcore’ demands or Marc Andreessen’s recent manifesto, the idea is that if you’re calling for people to take a pause and consider potential harms or complaining about the lack of representation, that is orthogonal to their business.” OpenAI is reportedly planning to expand the board soon, and speculation is rampant about who will join. Its conspicuously all-male and all-white makeup certainly did not go unnoticed, and OpenAI is already looking at prospects who might placate some critics. According to a Bloomberg report, philanthropist Laurene Powell Jobs, former Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer, and former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice were all considered but not selected. At the time of publication, OpenAI had not responded to repeated requests for comment. For many onlookers, it’s crucial to choose someone who will advocate balancing ambition with safety and responsibility—someone whose line of inquiry might match that of Toner, for example, rather than someone who simply looks like her. “The sort of people that this board should be bringing back are people who are thinking about responsible or trustworthy technology, and safety,” says Kay Firth-Butterfield, CEO of Good Tech Advisory. “There are a lot of women out there who are experts in that particular field.” As OpenAI searches for new board members, it may meet resistance from prospects wary of the real power dynamics within the company. There are already concerns about tokenization. “I just feel like the person on the board would have a horrible time because they will constantly be fighting an uphill battle,” says Gebru. “Used as a token and not to really make any kind of difference.” She’s not the only person within the world of AI ethics to question whether new board members would be marginalized. “I wouldn’t touch that board with a ten-foot pole,” Luccioni says. She feels she couldn’t recommend a friend take that sort of position, either. “Such stress!” Meredith Whittaker, president of messaging app Signal, sees value in bringing someone to the board who isn’t just another startup founder, but she doubts that adding a single woman or person of color will set them up to affect meaningful change. Unless the expanded board is able to genuinely challenge Altman and his allies, packing it with people who tick off demographic boxes to satisfy calls for diversity could amount to little more than “diversity theater.” “We’re not going to solve the issue—that AI is in the hands of concentrated capital at present—by simply hiring more diverse people to fulfill the incentives of concentrated capital,” Whittaker says. “I worry about a discourse that focuses on diversity and then sets folks up in rooms with [expletive] Larry Summers without much power.”

She will make an excellent VP for Trump

I have seen some calls this year that defy logic. Been a football fan for 40 years. This is the worst time ever for the refs. When they go the replay you can clearly see it was a bad call and yet the refs will not admit they were wrong. A personal foul on the defense when will levis slid into them. A personal foul on a qb hit where the defense pulled up at the last second and flew OVER the qb. with his FOOT baaaaaarly touching the QB as he went over the top of him. No way it was a penalty but the announcers were like yep...he touched his leg. They should just do away with defense all together and just let the offense run a scrimmage vs ghost defenders.

He is owned in less than half of yahoo leagues.