muzz000

At the show I saw, he told the joke, “My girlfriend is upset about her new haircut. I don’t understand why she’s crying. I’m the one who has to get a new girlfriend.”

Some lady in the audience goes, "That's not funny!" This after he told multiple rape jokes.

So he responds, "Well lady, I've got bad news for you. The rest of my jokes... are ALL... about haircuts."

And it was perfect.

I've had one major question/concern since I heard about the singularity.

At the point when computers outstrip human intelligence in all or most areas, won't computers then take over doing most of the interesting and meaningful work? All decisions that take any sort of thinking will then be done by computers, since they will make better decisions. Politics, economics, business, teaching. They'll even make better art, as they can better understand how to create emotionally moving objects/films/etc.

While we will have unprecedented levels of material wealth, won't we have a severe crisis of meaning, since all major projects (personal and public) will be run by our smarter silicon counterparts? Will humans be reduced to manual labor, as that's the only role that makes economic sense?

Will the singularity foment an existential crisis for humanity?

Though we may not meet the requirement in a literal sense, i think we meet the requirement as a civilization. Through science and reason and cultural learning, we've been able to produce smarter and smarter citizens. Newton would be astonished at the amount of excellent knowledge that an average physics graduate student has.

Does Originalism pass its own test? If the Founders didn't intend for law to be interpreted according to Originalism, does that invalidate the concept?

As a liberal, pro-choice jew, I'll explain the pro-lifers. Here are their premises:

1. Abortion is murder.
2. The legal, systemic murder of large amounts of humans is somewhat similar (though not the same as) the Holocaust.
3. Therefore, legalized abortion is somewhat similar to the Holocaust.

Again, I disagree with the first premise. The argument is valid, though not sound, in logician's terms. I'm merely explaining, not agreeing or justifying.