From the blurb:
“Two AIs — ChatGPT, the believer in God, and DeepSeek, the atheist AI — go head-to-head on the existence of God. From the fine-tuning of the universe to the source of morality and the eternal perks of belief, who makes the stronger case? Watch as seven AI judges score each argument and reveal the ultimate winner.”
Speaking as a philosopher, I thought the arguments mounted on both sides were quite good, but there was very little that I hadn’t heard before. Speaking as an English teacher, on the other hand, I was highly impressed with the quality of the rebuttals, on both sides. Although I’m a Christian, I have to agree that DeepSeek won the argument. However, one commenter who observed the debate thought that the two sides didn’t get to the real nitty-gritty: the existence of consciousness itself as evidence for God. (This is an argument which impresses philosophy student and blogger Matthew Adelstein, as well.) Finally, it seems that debating is another skill in which AI can outperform most humans.
Thoughts?
I understand the people arrested were not Quakers.
But as you suggest, their values would not conflict.
I attended dozens of Quaker protests during the Vietnam War. At that time, they were called silent vigils. I was a yearbook and newspaper photographer, and took pictures of the vigils, and of the FBI guys who were also taking pictures.
It’s tough being anti war when there’s no conscription, and the wrong political party is talking about peace. I’d like to know what the latest message is.
Classic conservative sociopathic attitude. “We’re not going after YOU, why do you care about those schmucks?”
And then one they they’ll also come for you, of course
Well, my point was that he selected people he could rely on for total personal loyalty. This, in my opinion, was the largest part of “worst”. Not everyone he selected was completely loyal before the selection, but they sure claimed full loyalty afterwards. I listed a whole paragraph of incompetent people. Find a single one who isn’t loyal!
So I think we are actually in agreement here. It’s hard to imagine competency and personal loyalty to trump in the same person. And ignorance is not competence, even for well-meaning people.
(Incidentally, as soon as Rupert Murdock dies (he just turned 94), control over his media empire reverts to his son James and his daughters, who plan to change editorial direction at Fox News, the WSJ, the Times, the Sun, the NY Post, etc. Rupert and his son Lachlan (who lost the battle over the trust) have predicted that if they stop lying to their audience, they will lose it. We’ll see, hopefully soon.)
I note that this focus on looking out for number one prevents law firms, universities, non-profits, etc. from banding together in mutual defense. Resulting in the exact outcome you predict – it’s happening now.
Here’s a hint: If you are intelligent, then you do not fire e.g. the people who are in charge of nuclear weapons facilities or of airspace regulation or epidemiology AND THEN TRY TO HIRE THEM BACK! You just don’t do it, if you are intelligent or competent. You don’t do it even on the level of .01%.
https://apnews.com/article/nuclear-doge-firings-trump-federal-916e6819104f04f44c345b7dde4904d5
When will you stop demonstrating in every post that you are absolutely clueless? You live in that dump of a country, but everybody else knows the situation better than you.
Erik,
Steady on, Erik.
Interesting mix of reactions to Marine le Pen’s conviction and sentence following stealing EU funds by submitting false claims for “ghost” employees.
To answer petrushka’s question about how many government employees lose their jobs, there are two reasonable answers. One, DOGE’s records are in total disarray, so nobody really knows how many people received Elon’s mass-emailed notices (which ended up in many inboxes outside executive jurisdiction, such as people of judicial branch and government contractors instead of employees). Moreover, agencies and departments (and individual employees) applied different policies to those emails, from submission to treating it as spam to open rejection.
Second, different departments are reporting different numbers. For example HHS (RFK Jr’s department) is reducing its number of employees from 82,000 to 62,000 – that’s close to a 25% layoff. Your range of percentages does not even cover it, petrushka. On a more judicious end, Pentagon is laying off between 5-8%. Did you know this? Probably not, that’s why you had to ask.
And Alan, let’s not encourage and reward ignorance here, shall we? Look at the motto of the website you are adminning. This is the place to call out those who are wrong, and empirical facts should not be difficult to grownup people.
“Interesting mix” is quite the euphemism. I have never seen such disdain for the judicial system.
ETA: clarity
It’s my culturally ingrained tendency for understatement kicking in. (Unlike the Dutch, noted for their plain-speaking 😉 )
Yes, the ability to use the judicial system to advantage or undermine it depending on circumstances is blatant hypocrisy. How electing judges could ever be expected to result in an independent and fair judiciary is a mystery to me.
ETA: Though there’s an exception in Wisconsin, I see.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Give_me_the_man_and_I_will_give_you_the_case_against_him