Joey, have you ever been to a Turkish recruitment office?

Assuming it survives the fall to the bottom of the elevator shaft, the building management should be able to retrieve it for you.

At first I thought this was an announcement from Microsoft.

Krombiception, of course.

…you do have krombiception, don’t you?

Each decade of age took me half as long as the previous one did.

0-10 took forever

10-20 took 20 years

20-30 took 10 years

30-40 took 5 years

And I fear it only gets worse.

Parent: Say “dad”

Baby: “Dad”

Don’t leave us hanging. Who won the argument?

Let us, like Him, hold up one shoe and let the other be upon our foot, for this is His sign, that all who follow Him shall do likewise.

“Not do anything useful” would be more accurate than “do nothing”. But that’s just my tl;dr.

[…] the resolution also contains many unbalanced, inaccurate, and unwise provisions the United States cannot support. This resolution does not articulate meaningful solutions for preventing hunger and malnutrition or avoiding their devastating consequences.

The United States is concerned that the concept of “food sovereignty” could justify protectionism or other restrictive import or export policies […]

We also do not accept any reading of this resolution or related documents that would suggest that States have particular extraterritorial obligations arising from any concept of a “right to food,” which we do not recognize and has no definition in international law.

https://usun.usmission.gov/explanation-of-vote-of-the-third-committee-adoption-of-the-right-to-food-resolution/

tl;dr:

1. The USA doesn’t think the resolution actually does anything useful, even if it supports the intention
2. The USA, the largest exporter of food, is concerned how the resolution might impact food exports
3. The USA doesn’t recognize the imposition of legal obligations to act outside of its own territory

But the resolution passed anyway, which is why world hunger has disappeared.

…are non-US peanut butters less viscous?

Reminds me of the old trick on HTML forms where you use CSS to make one of the form fields invisible to humans and reject any submission that filled in that field.

Dragons, giants, monsters, that sort of thing. They weren’t entirely wrong.

Information superhighway

E099: PROGRAMMER IS OVERLY POLITE

Obligatory:

You don’t go out looking for a job dressed like that? On a weekday?

The problem is that an AI built to maximize paperclips might conclude that converting the planet to paperclips is an acceptable cost of maximizing paperclip production. It might understand why humans think it’s bad to convert the planet, but disagree. It would need to be explicitly programmed to prioritize human life over paperclips.

otherwise we would just switch it off

If it were super-intelligent, it could probably trick us into leaving it turned on.

A paperclip maximizer driven by self-preservation? What could possiblie go wrong?