So Pixar can't stop.

Perhaps the theme of the movie is keeping babies with superpowers entertained long enough that they don't destroy the world.

So...they've got at least 3 things in common with the other side! See? We have more in common than not!

It does seem like a catch 22 situation. If the signs don't attract attention then...whats the point, but if they do then surely that is attention that would otherwise be on the road.

But how different is telling a drone "kill the person with this face" to telling a missile "fly here and blow up". The video seems to show ez-assassination technology (tm) being used by "the wrong" humans, not AI going rogue and deciding who lives and who dies on its own.

To me, the video is scary not because of AI, but because of how easy and inconsequential it portrays murder. It makes you wonder if that isn't sort of the end goal of advanced warfare technology - the more surgical it becomes the further it deviates from our idea of what war is - this is drone warfare and it's nebulous legality taken to the very extreme.

What I perhaps find unsettling in myself is that I find this somehow worse than open warfare - as if its not the loss of life that bothers me, but the sinister efficiency of it. Is that really a valid criticism? Why is it "more ok" to fly a plane to drop a bomb on some foreigner than for a drone to do it - is it because it simply costs/risks us more, that technology like this cheapens human life?

The AI takin over is scary too. I just hope they work out in time that the only winning move is not to play.

Does anybody else LOATHE touchscreens? I mean, I grudgingly accept them on smart phones but most of the time they are just shit.

While it was certainly an admirable attempt at humour we all think that playing fast and loose with the truth, even by omission, is too great a price to pay for cheap laughs. Please be more responsible in the future.

Yeah, I'll take the wine thanks.

And I don't drink wine.

99% invisible are excellent.

Not surprising given Christianity is like, The Religion of Dad. All praise the almighty father.

It's creepy but eh... dunno if incestuous. That "needing a male touch" line was bleugh tho. and the sexism. Where are the sons dating their mothers? Surely they need to practice wielding their authority over women?

I mean, this is as literal as patriarchy gets

I still spell "weird" wrong all the time because of that i before e bullshit.

Still, I'm glad English is my first language. Really I am truly sorry for anybody that has to pick it up second. Maybe it's not the worst (no/little grammatical gender!) but the hodgepodge of different spellings and pronunciations is awful.

Perhaps that's why

I imagine it must be quite hard to make comfortable flip flops.

Curious that it splutters for a good while. I expected the water to boil more or less instantly and all get released at once.

I don't think brussel sprouts are food, but I won't be campaigning to stop other people eating them if they want to.

They must think gay marriage devalues the currency, that their marriage will somehow be less sacred because other people have a different idea what it means. As if straight people haven't been fucking it up enough already.

Also, does anybody else find it strange that gay marriage seems to be entirely about men most of the time. Why is that?

ps. Can straight people get a civil partnership now please.

I think it's an ugly necessity.

Equality isn't about treating everybody the same. I mean, I wish we could do that, but then I wish people wouldn't decide if they are going to hire somebody from their very first glance. But that's what we do. We do nothing and we simply allow our unconscious bias to rule our decision making which, in most cases, would be great for somebody like me.

I mean, I don't like it. I can understand entirely why people feel they have been cheated when somebody gets a job or promotion ahead of them just for the sake of ticking a diversity checkbox. Maybe you're right, maybe it is just adding energy to that pendulum, but then a pendulum without resistance swings forever. I hope conscious decisions to readdress imbalanced caused by unconscious bias works more as a dampening effect, as resistance.

Back to semantics. Like the woman in the video, I probably had quite a knee-jerk response to men's rights. Sometimes probably warranted, but then some feminists have some pretty dumb things to say as well. Anyway, the person that helped changed by mind about it was a woman and a feminist. Don't define a group by it's most extreme edges because I think it just leads you to make uncharitable judgements about people that identify as part of that group before you've even really listened to them.

So I'm not a true feminist? I mean, I confess I wasn't born in Scotland but...

Semantics. I've argued them before.

I guess yes, feminism is as sexist as, say, affirmative action is racist. Making allowances for a disability, is, I suppose, a sort of discrimination too.

Anyway. What we call ourselves on the internet probably doesn't matter very much.