Maybe 500 years by today's behavioral standards. I assume that if people were told you could live ~forever barring an accident leading to your death, many people in society would behave VERY differently. The risk profile of you or me getting in a car to drive to the store is VERY different than someone with age-and-sickness-proof-but-accident-vulnerable immortality.
Incidentally this is one reason why people in the past seemed braver than now and did crazier things. When your life expectancy is 25, you take a lot more risks.
Ridiculing genuine curiosity is a terrible behavior from teachers... why stifle inquisitive minds? Anyway, you may already be familiar with these proposed biochemistries, but there has been a lot of speculation on this exact question over the years:
Could you please elaborate on the distinction that you see between "artificial" intelligence and whatever it is that we as humans possess? Furthermore, what specific aspects of this intelligence are unachievable by an AI? Is it a "human intelligence is non-computational" line of thinking?
Machines are not alive, they are constructed and for them to develop intelligence the capacity would either need to be constructed too (how?) or it would need to appear as an 'emergent quality'. I think the latter is the line that believers in the concept of 'AI' mostly take but I see it as magical thinking as we have had no indications of such emergent behaviour in our experience with the machines we have constructed, nor are there any good reasons as far as I can see as to why we might hope or expect it to appear. I see it only as a part of the long history of humans and human cultures projecting their own intelligence and agency onto inanimate objects. Again, 'magical thinking'.
I acknowledge and am mostly fine with the idea that machines can 'learn'. But they learn (the game of Go, navigating a car in the real world, etc) under our direction and training (even if they potentially go on to surpass our abilities in these tasks). They don't have any agency; they don't have any curiosity; they don't have any 'spirit of consciousness'; they are not intelligent. They have simply been trained and learnt to perform a task. It's a great mistake to confuse this with intelligence. And the field itself is acknowledging this mistake as it matures, with the ongoing change of nomenclature from 'Artificial intelligence' to 'machine learning'.
Not that you're wrong about US factory farming, but this article (and the photos) are only concerned with Canada. It's, unfortunately, not just a US problem.
Depending on where you are, you can use Curb or something similar to pair with your ride and let the app handle payment. I use it (or just hailing cabs) almost exclusively over Uber/Lyft these days, typically 1/2 the price and the drivers don’t get lost in the city either.
There's the IP code (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Code) but I've only seen it used with respect to devices. It's unclear (to me) if it would cover something like this.
For inputs that are going to get hashed that seems reasonable, as well as for single-purpose systems. On the flipside, this seems like a great way to have unintended consequences downstream in more complex systems. That "out of memory" condition may appear as an ephemeral bug or slowdown that surfaces not at input time but at retrieval by another service.
Serious question: is it still possible to get a hold of asbestos clothing and/or accessories (bags, napkin, etc.)? Also, how dangerous are these materials relative to the finer and more processed industrial counterparts?
AFAIU asbestos is technically a legal/commercial classification that encompasses a few different types of minerals. In the U.S. the EPA sees them all as carcinogenic enough that it stopped encouraging comparative health research between the various types.
For fabrics and such, you'd most likely be getting chrysotile, or white asbestos.
The main problem with all of these minerals is that they are highly friable, meaning that they flake off easily when handled, and these flakes are what cause asbestosis and mesothelioma. My (limited) understanding is that the particle size for "unprocessed" asbestos is still small enough to be carcinogenic. Hopefully, a pulmonologist can weigh in and give a better answer.
Anyway, I've seen numbers before that Russia, China, Brazil and several other countries still produce a lot of asbestos and related products. You could probably pick something up from those places, but most developed countries heavily regulate this stuff, so you'd likely have a hard time importing the stuff without some really good reasons.
If you're interested, the site asbestos.com has a lot of good overiews on the industrial, legal and medical history that you can dig into.
That article barely touches on the different types of asbestos or the relative dangers after different kinds of processing. It's not much of an answer to the question.
We use it constantly in bars in Berkeley. Example:
"The pronouncements of [insert least favorite politician here] do not exhibit the faintest degree of verisimilitude." You can add rhetorical flourish by taking a thoughtful sip of beer immediately thereafter.
