augment001

> Its not a false premise, there has been many anthropological studies that form the basis for catastrophism, extinction and a changing earth, they have been backed up with evidence for hundreds of years.

Did these past catastrophes involve AI and computers?

It’s more than slightly overstated. It’s a total lie.

Showing up at someone’s house and killing someone because they have your phone is always illegal in every US state.

I don’t know why people are trying to defend this. It’s complete misinformation.

I don’t think so.

Can you quote something that Sangeeth wrote that indicates how they disagree with me?

How is that relevant to Sangeeth69’s comment?

There doesn’t seem to be any connection between what they said and what I said.

Can you explain how this has any relevance at all to going to someone else’s house and killing them because you wrongly think your cellphone is somewhere nearby?

As far as I can see the person who I was replying to is simply making this up.

I think you’re spreading misinformation. I hope it’s not intentional.

There is not a single state in the US where it is legal to shoot someone just for being on your property.

In what state is it legal to kill people for stealing your stuff?

I’m curious why you imagine anyone is expecting that?

There are technologists other than Apple who could help them understand.

Expecting journalists to have an answer before writing a piece is very reasonable.

Apple always has two choices. Adapt or die. They always respond in the same way. They adapt to provide integrated end user benefits from emerging technologies, and expose those technologies to developers on their platforms.

Why would this be any different?

Why not?

Sure, but if you buy something and it’s not delivered and there is no customer service department, it’s probably the best recourse.

Why not just cancel the payment?

> The contention is if history has gone through multiple and innumerable cycles and has ended up at the same outcome multiple times before.

The first problem is that this is simply a false premise. Very few people would make such a claim, and none can back it up with evidence.

The second is that you still seem to think that technological change has no impact on history.