Polls: Society & Politics

LMFAO! This is what the AI said:

Major threats to the end of humanity along with their estimated likelihoods within the next century:

Unaligned Artificial Intelligence (AI): Approximate likelihood 1 in 10. This involves superintelligent AI systems whose goals may not align with human values, posing the highest anthropogenic extinction risk.

Engineered Global Pandemic: Approximate likelihood 1 in 30. This threat includes artificially created infectious diseases with high lethality and fast transmission.

Nuclear War: Lower but significant risk, possibly around 1 in 100 or more. While nuclear war could cause catastrophic destruction, total human extinction is debated.

Climate Change Failure: Moderate risk, roughly 1 in 10 to 1 in 20. While it could cause global calamity, it is less likely to lead to complete extinction.

Nanotechnology Risk: Lower and uncertain likelihood. Potential risks include misuse or accidents involving molecular nanotechnology.

Natural Catastrophes (asteroids, supervolcanoes, stellar explosions, coronal mass ejection, gamma rays,): Very low likelihood, roughly 1 in 1,000,000 per century combined. These events are rare but

Experts estimate the risk of human extinction this century may be around 1 in 6 (17%), with large uncertainties. Man-made risks are considered much more probable than natural.

I have noticed some people equate being further educated with being smart. “I would never want the father of my kids to be uneducated.” College educated does NOT mean more intelligent. I have found that the only thing being college educated actually means is that you are more likely to align with the establishment.

I often hear racist talk about how women and non-white men do not deserve their position in Western society most of the time. What about in cases like this? where a 19 y/o WHITE MALE is likely going to be appointed as a board of director for a multi-billion dollar company. How many white males get free hand out and position in America due to their family connections?

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/immigration/article312442984.html#storylink=cpyWith

The 64-year-old had spent nearly his entire adult life behind bars for a murder he did not commit. His conviction had been vacated weeks earlier after a court found that prosecutors had concealed evidence that would have dismantled the state’s case. The Centre County district attorney formally withdrew all charges a day before his expected release.

ICE notes that "Mr. Vedam, a career criminal with a rap sheet dating back to 1980, is also a convicted controlled substance trafficker,” ICE said in an email. “Mr. Vedam will be held in ICE custody while the agency arranges for his removal in accordance with all applicable laws and due-process requirements

ICE cited a “legacy deportation order” dating back to the 1980s, tied not only to the murder charge but also to an earlier drug conviction from Vedam’s youth. Before his arrest for murder, he had pleaded guilty at age 19 to intent to distribute LSD — a charge his family describes as a youthful mistake. Although that conviction carried its own immigration consequences, Subu, who was born in India but arrived in the United States when he was 9 months old, was never deported because he was serving a life sentence

Grounds for deportation
Criminal violations: Crimes involving "moral turpitude," controlled substances, or "aggravated felonies" can lead to deportation.
Public safety threats: Non-citizens who are considered a threat to public safety can be deported.
Immigration violations: This includes failing to maintain the nonimmigrant status of a visa, overstaying a visa, or violating the conditions of entry.
Illegal entry or reentry: Unauthorized entry or reentry into the U. S. is a deportable offense.

One of the world’s most important nature groups is weighing a call for a moratorium on allowing genetically engineered plants or animals, such as canines edited to appear like extinct “dire wolves,” from being released into the wild.

Advocates for the temporary ban, which is being considered at a meeting of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), worry about the dangers of engineered organisms upending nature. The consequences of any misstep, they say, may be uncontainable and irreversible.

“We need to put funding towards nature conservation strategies that we know work and not trying to bring back animals that don’t exist,” said Joann Sy, a scientific adviser to a Paris-based conservation group called Pollinis, a lead sponsor of the moratorium. But opponents of the proposal say that beyond “de-extinction” efforts, synthetic biology holds great untapped potential to save nature, not hurt it. Such a blanket ban, even if temporary, only threatens to drive more plants and animals to the brink, they say.

NYT today:

American Jews, long Israel’s strongest domestic backers, have turned sharply critical of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his right-wing government over the Gaza conflict. A majority believe Israel has committed war crimes as it has killed tens of thousands of civilians and restricted food aid, and four in 10 believe it is guilty of genocide, a new Washington Post survey found — a charge Israel denies. The shift has created new incentives for even moderate Democrats in Congress to get tough on Israel, including by curtailing U. S. military aid.

The damage is also increasingly bipartisan. Despite Republican efforts to identify their party with Israel and to tag Democrats as providing aid and comfort to its enemies, younger evangelical Christians are breaking with their parents on the issue, seeing Israel as an oppressor rather than as a victim. And the breakup extends beyond evangelicals. "Everybody under 30 is against Israel,” the conservative commentator Megyn Kelly offhandedly told Tucker Carlson on his podcast last month.

The question is whether those younger Americans will be lost to Israel long-term — and what Israel’s advocates will do to try to reverse that. Israel’s dependence on U. S. support had become so glaring over the course of the war — in political, military and economic terms — that Israel would be motivated to treat its possible defeat in the court of American public opinion as an “existential threat.”

What would make the United States any different? There is a difference between welcoming immigration and allowing exploitation.

I wouldn't force my way into another nation, alter the cultures of their area, participate in riots, and wave my nation's flag in defiance. What kind of nation do we live in today to think this is acceptable?

Part of immigration is integration and assimilation.

I grew up at one point thinking liberals and the left were respectful, recognizing, and mindful of different cultures. Part of respecting cultures is not allowing foreign cultures to coerce and trample over one another. It works both ways.

You don't enter a foreign land being abrasive, demanding, and aggressive. You enter being humble and respectful.

Foreign entry into the United States is a privilege, not a right.