The retort is an insult. Lol.

The fact you can not answer that speaks volumes. Really it does.

Ignoring creative liberties, it is assumed silicone based life forms would need high temps to thrive. Is quite possible that they would immediately die if exposed to human temps. Possibly these high temps would result in very fast computational skills.

Is interesting though. The speed at which you think is not entirely related to intelligence. If you created a computer the size of the solar system, it would be far far far more intelligent than an individual human. But because information would take hours to traverse across different regions of that brain, conversations and answers to questions might be incredible slow to come. We actually already take this into consideration when designing computers. The physical length memory is from the CPU is now critical.

Perception. People trust a vote that is more transparent and completed by two independent people.

Personally I trust the electronic one entirely but I could see it a bug occurring that puts some future election results in question. Would you trust it if an AI wrote the program?

If you read my post, I did say wealth inequality is an issue. Bit to directly answer your question, if everyone suddenly recieved more money, would they differently be motivated to build more houses or create more cogs to make it lives better? And if they don’t, how does this help us?

And this would somehow cause a significant number of houses to be built? And if people have more money thru distribution of some sort, would they work harder to build more houses? If they don’t, how does this help?

Balloons are open. Most typically do not expand but the excess air just escapes out the bottom. Basically they will rise till the overall weight matches that if what they displace.

There are more efficient balloons that do expand and can attain same great heights. Far more than conventional aircraft even. But that expansion is mostly due to excess material in the construction and little from stretching. Thus the pressure difference is minimal while the volume increase significantly with altitude.

You could tax them at 100% but it wouldn’t fix the problem. There are simply just not enough of them. While wealth inequality is a problem, this alone don’t fix it. It is just a crutch.

How many people who are pissed with the results might claim an alternate cast vote later on just to bring the machines into question? It wouldn’t take many to do this to create a fair amount of distrust.

A rock may be intelligence. It just thinks at a far shower rate than humans.

I did. Who are there companies?

Everyone?

It would be done in a second if there was value to it. Especially large companies as often there are bonuses based on profits. Or do you actually think directors and CEOs would rather make less personal income?

It is goofy that people actually think productivity would remain the same when working far less hours and believe the same number of houses (or insert any product here) would be built. Or that a pilot test would remain accurate if the people involved in it did not know it was a simple experiment. Tell me if those companies that experienced more productivity, why did they not continue to implement it?

Most jobs no it doesn’t. Everyone would be doing it and splitting the difference if it did. Good luck with that one.

If less is being built, how will this help you to have less spending power?

Shorting is a very important and good mechanism to bring prices back down to earth for any stock. Without it, you would see even higher valuation of which ultimately will be corrected to real financials and valuations. Be it one week or one century. And without shorting, there would be even more l people making dumb investments and intimately being bag holders.

But about as democratic as can be. No one was forced to buy Reddit. Benefit or not to the company, the company was essentially sold. The new owners of their very own choice will want a return. A big return to essentially cover 8 billion they just paid for it.

Reddit will need tens of billions in revenue to make the profits those new owners will demand. It is that drive to justify the cost that will make it another shitty bloated ad platform.

We have a great great great great … grandfather that was a single cell.

Their capitalization was I believe around 8 billion. This is the number they need to understandably recover from an investment point of view. If I was an investor in a risky type of investment like this. Risky mainly in that it could be a dog forever, I would want to see 25 prevent profit in their financial statements relatively quick.

I am saying this all from an investment point of view of the people that now own it. More or less, Reddit needs to start showning profits of some 1.6 billion a year. That likely means they need 10 or 10s if billions in revenue per year. That will give you an idea what they will be developing and how advertising will need to be excessive. They will go the way of tiktok and other platforms in that emotional and divisive algorithms increase viewership.

Because it is called Obamacare. If you ask if they approve of the Affordable Care Act, support is much higher.

It is the same thing people. Stop calling it Obamacare and start using ACA or Affordable Care Act. Obamacare is not is name.