Artificial intelligence has arrived. Todayâ€™s computers are discerning and sharp. They can sense the environment, untangle knotty problems, make subtle judgments and learn from experience. They donâ€™t think the way we thinkâ€”theyâ€™re still as mindless as toothpicksâ€”but they can replicate many of our most prized intellectual talents. Dazzled by our brilliant new machines, weâ€™ve been rushing to hand them all sorts of sophisticated jobs that we used to do ourselves.
But our growing reliance on computer automation may be exacting a high price. Worrisome evidence suggests that our own intelligence is withering as we become more dependent on the artificial variety. Rather than lifting us up, smart software seems to be dumbing us down....
Guess that clicks together brother Mike from NY. If being moral is inadequate then you vote for a party who puts out immorality as part of their agenda. Pro abortion, pro LGBT, vote God out of platform, steal people's money via taxes, ignore the law of the land, tell lies to get legislation passed, etc. etc.
Now seeing that most Catholics vote democratic not sure why Jim would bring them up, seems like that would be a black eye for his party of choice. (You do know that independent and democrat go hand in hand, just look at the voting records of the so called independents in Congress)
Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.
When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn
Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people
14 Enter not into the path of the wicked, and go not in the way of evil men.
15 Avoid it, pass not by it, turn from it, and pass away.
16 For they sleep not, except they have done mischief; and their sleep is taken away, unless they cause some to fall.
No, Mike of N.Y., I'm just pointing out that a "Christian" Caliphate is entirely anti-Christian. No Muhammadan countries think they can create moralism-- The Inadequacy of Moralism
Not the Romish agenda? Let's see the newly elected GOP Catholic Governor of Nebr. supports vouchers. I don't know what he's going to do about is a death penalty is to be carried out, but the GOP Romish judges we now have on the Nebr. benches have basically neutered our death penalty. There's also a strong push for private school financing besides. No, those responsible for immorality can be associated with both political parties. I usually run out of room to put this up with stock supply to dominionists, but go read that again, Catholic Church and politics in the United States. Also I often run out of room to put this one up as well, What is Dominion Theology? (PDF)
Jim Lincoln wrote: Jamie considering we were never a Christian nation, one can't use that for pushing for a better country. if you wanted a better country go spread the gospel and that gospel isn't according to the Republican Party. Go read the URL links in the second paragraph of my post before yours.
You seem to be the only one needing the strawman of the "gospel of the Republican Party." The only one making such association. It's understandable we're not a Christian nation, but that hardly justifies any Christian supporting government corruption disguised as compassion. And fyi, posting how moralism is not adequate hardly justifies the blatant support of the growing immorality promoted by your Caesar.
Jamie wrote: Jim LINCOLN I don't come here for balance. I come here to on share ideas about contempoary social and religous injustice that is rampant in b our society. This Christian nation is being desstroyed by deception from within. The living breathing Word of God is not "balanced". It proclaims truth in spite of those who are blinded by the god of this world. If i want balance I'll get another 200 lb. Man and go and play teeter totter.
Jamie considering we were never a Christian nation, one can't use that for pushing for a better country. if you wanted a better country go spread the gospel and that gospel isn't according to the Republican Party. Go read the URL links in the second paragraph of my post before yours.
Jim LINCOLN I don't come here for balance. I come here to on share ideas about contempoary social and religous injustice that is rampant in b our society. This Christian nation is being desstroyed by deception from within. The living breathing Word of God is not "balanced". It proclaims truth in spite of those who are blinded by the god of this world. If i want balance I'll get another 200 lb. Man and go and play teeter totter.
Since this was turned into a political, admittedly partly my fault, but hey the article was about a mind-numbing potential problem, I just couldn't help remembering another mind-numbing encounter which might have had me voting for Wild Bill Clinton, if I hadn't stopped listening to Rush. I will put this up as gentle reminder to me, and to anyone else around.
I'm sorry to say that my comments aren't as memorable as they should be. But I have pointed out in the past that Rush Limbaugh was sometimes or at least appear to be a secret agent for the Liberals. I remember his one note samba attack on wild Willy Clinton, got so tiresome that I almost felt sorry for Clinton. I resisted that feeling and still didn't vote for him. So, I never had much of a kind word for Wild Bill etc. Sometimes PBS does have a good series -- however I often do not give them a blanket endorsement. I like the portions of the series, the Roosevelts, and intimate history, e.g., that covered the life of Theodore Roosevelt, a very good Republican. A pity that more GOPers don't copy him in some of his practices. I never even bothered to watch the whole section on Franklin. So I am NOT a mindless liberal -- or reactionary.
As I pointed out before, since all that I see here on SA but sometimes I even quote from right wing sources-- except the newamerican magazine, which I do avoid, I strive to see a balance on SA as much as anything else. There would be very little balance, unfortunately, if I didn't.
If talk radio has an affect on elections it sure isn't an effective one. First, the vast majority (percentage in mid to high 90's) of the newsprint, all the major networks (including PBS) and their affiliates (with the exception of FOX news not the FOX network) are the voice of the left. So, conservative talk radio doesn't begin to balance the equation. (liberal talk radio has no audience) Second, during the era of talk radio which effectively began in 1989 with Rush Limbaugh, we have had the democrats in control of both houses of congress (1989-1995;2007-2011) and the presidential nominees that lost were moderates Dole, McCain, and Romney (arguable the most conservative of the 3). Conservative talk radio isn't popular because they win a lot of converts to conservatism (they do have people that see the light) it is popular because conservatives finally heard on the radio or tv people who think like they already did. (far contrary to the belief that talk radio tells conservatives how to think)
Is this your true colors coming out? You think only ignorant people vote against the Democrsts and their agenda? You don't see that as a condescending and arrogant attitude towards those who don't share your viewpoint?