I think he believes he gets to keep that blood money from Saudi Arabia.

As for his South Korea claim....there is no agreement for them to pay a dime next year, because Trump could only negotiate a 1 year extension to the 5 year payment plan Obama negotiated. Contrary to Trump's ignorant lies, for >3 decades the cost sharing agreement has been negotiated on a 5 year basis with S. Korea paying the U.S. yearly, but Trump has been incapable of negotiating and today there's no payment agreement at all. Only 4% of South Koreans support paying what Trump's demanding, making his current near $5 billion demand (a 400%+ increase from last year) a clear deal killer....which might end our cooperative agreement with another ally.
Japan's cost sharing agreement is up for renegotiation next year, expect the same level of absolute failure in those negotiations and the loss of another ally and the loss of more US influence in the Pacific.

*promote exposing the ridiculously easily debunked lies being used to hide the total failure to negotiate successfully.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/to-make-korea-pay-more-for-security-trump-has-to-show-his-shopping-list-11578393004

In reality, it wasn't spare time tinkering at all, it was serious academics doing full time paid research funded by the government. ARPANET, while funded by the defense department, was designed by and connected college researchers, the first transmissions were between UCLA and Stanford in 69, not the military. This was the first networking, the infant internet.
The military system in the 60's was a point to point tonal encryption system that ran on proprietary bell telephone systems with dedicated direct phone lines until the FCC forced Bell to give up it's capitalistic monopoly in 68, allowing for advancements in both the public and eventually private sector that led to the infant internet instead of just individual "computers" (and I use the term lightly here) directly communicating. Remember, back then, almost into the 90's, you needed to know the direct phone number of the other computer to connect (think "War Games"), there was no publicly accessible network.
The first retail internet transaction wasn't until 94.

Also imo, it was weird individuals tinkering in their spare time that made home computing anything more than very expensive word processors/calculators. We've had PCs since the 70's in my home, I remember what they could do then....I'm one of those weird individuals.

Long and short, your 5 different capitalistic ways ALL stem from a purely socialist base and a socialist denial of private for profit monopolies, and most if not all of them were developed and implemented using at least some public funding. Without that, we would still be using bell telephone phone modems to direct dial each other. Without public/private cooperation, neither sector could advance like they have together.
Imo, it's not an either/or situation, it's both.

Utter Russian/Ukrainian separatist propaganda bullshit Bob. Not a single letter of truth in how it's presented.

The Burisma investigation began before Biden was hired, and was not being investigated by Shokin before or at the time he was fired for being corrupt himself.

April 18, 2014: Hunter Biden, 44, son of Joe Biden, joins the board of directors of Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company. Biden’s directorship attracts attention because Burisma is owned by Mykola Zlochevsky, a minister under Yanukovych. Zlochevsky and subsidiaries of Burisma had faced accusations of money laundering, fraud and tax evasion. (Zlochevsky and the company have denied the allegations.)

Feb. 10, 2015: Ukraine appoints Viktor Shokin as prosecutor general. Shokin inherits some of the investigations into Zlochevsky and his company. But Vitaliy Kasko, who serves as Shokin’s deputy overseeing international cooperation until he resigned in protest, told Bloomberg in 2019 that, under Shokin, the investigation into Burisma remained dormant. Kasko said the matter was "shelved by Ukrainian prosecutors in 2014 and through 2015," and Bloomberg reported that documents backed up his account.

Winter 2015-16: Many Western leaders and institutions, as well as Ukrainian anti-corruption activists, view Shokin as corrupt and ineffective for failing to prosecute anybody of significance, and for protecting members of Yanukovych’s and Poroshenko’s circles. A frustrated Biden threatens to withhold $1 billion unless Shokin is fired. (He would later brag that his pressure tactics succeeded.)

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2019/oct/03/timeline-trump-impeachment-inquiry/


Well son of a bitch....Bob's Russian style cranial rectosis flares up again.

Biden used sanctioned government pressure with international support to publicly route out corruption, Dumb Donald's corruption gets more difficult to ignore daily, and is ALL about personal enrichment, and is done through secretive unsanctioned back channels like his personal attorney who has no business interfering in foreign affairs, then hidden in super top secret servers where they have no business being hidden.

How much money have Trump's children taken from other countries in the last 3 years? All accounts based on their own filings indicate it's hundreds of millions, much through new business dealings created after Trump took office and gifts like dozens of patents from China worth tens of millions.

The house has already subpoenaed their records along with Rick Perry's this morning.
Perry is accused of being complicit in the "arms for accusations" scheme by Trump and Guliani, actually Trump is trying to pin the scandal on Perry recently, but is also accused using his influence to appoint some Texas friends to head a Ukrainian state owned natural gas company. He has agreed to cooperate.
Ruh-Roe!

Sets a bad presidential precedent. Trump is a bad president without anyone's help. ;-)

The Democrats need to accept that and give Warren carte blanche to do anything at all, including a blanket repeal of all Treasonous Trump's legislation and agreements, and thumb their noses at Republican whining.

I say Democrats should, for one term only, use every trick, ploy, and scheme the Republicans have used for Trump to get us back on track, closing every loophole and making it a crime to support obstruction or "refusal to cooperate" as a public official after 3 years and 9 months.
Ignore them. Dismiss them. If they suggest any legislation, crush it, call it unAmerican and stupid, and laugh at their inability to do anything about it. Defund all their pet projects and corporate welfare programs and implement universal health care with the money saved.
Turnabout is fair play. I'm sick to death of Democrats turning the other cheek in the name of civility with an uncivil adversary.

He stupidly admitted there was a stenographer on the phone call, so unless they destroy it, there is a word for word transcript of the entire call that's already been subpoenaed, including the missing majority of the call not included in the summary they produced.

Also we now have confirmation of the quid quo pro in the form of emails directing the ambassador to set up a face to face meeting only if the Ukrainian president agrees to publicly investigate Biden.

Also, today Rick Perry resigned and declared his intention to cooperate fully with the investigation. That does not bode well for Trump.

Sadly, since the Senate majority doesn't care about the law or country, only protecting themselves from Trump's wrath and his terroristic followers, there's not a chance he will be removed, but not a chance he won't be exposed as a treasonous traitor either.

collusion
[kəˈlo͞oZHən]
NOUN

secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.

synonyms:
conspiracy · connivance · complicity · intrigue · plotting · secret understanding · collaboration · scheming

law
illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially between ostensible opponents in a lawsuit.

-------------------------

Is asking another country for help to hurt a political opponent illegal?
See: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-imposing-certain-sanctions-event-foreign-interference-united-states-election/

"any person acting as an agent of or on behalf of a foreign government, has acted with the intent or purpose of interfering in that election"

"to have directly or indirectly engaged in, sponsored, concealed, or otherwise been complicit in foreign interference in a United States election"

"the term “entity” means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization"

"the term “United States election” means any election for Federal office"

" the term “foreign interference,” with respect to an election, includes any covert, fraudulent, deceptive, or unlawful actions or attempted actions of a foreign government, or of any person acting as an agent of or on behalf of a foreign government, undertaken with the purpose or effect of influencing, undermining confidence in, or altering the result or reported result of, the election, or undermining public confidence in election processes or institutions"

Whatever you have to tell yourself, traitor.

How do you solve something that's going apeshit in another country? For starters, in the case of Ukraine and Crimea, we keep our obligations we agreed to and support them with the U.S. military from day one when Russia invaded Crimea, and again in Ukraine proper. Had we done that as we specifically and unambiguously agreed to do when they gave up their nukes in return, the "civil war" (that's clearly a foreign invasion) wouldn't have occurred. That's an Obama administration failure, one that seriously harmed our international standing and trustworthiness, imo. If we had just put 100 Marines on the borders, Russia wouldn't have risked WW3 to invade either country.
My point is human political or boundary issues are nothing compared to intentionally reengineering the makeup of the atmosphere and getting enough cooperation to implement the desired (required) changes.

If she changes policy in the west, that will impact the East....and South. What America does is more often than not mirrored, especially when we're successful.
Her impact is more for the public than governments. Sway enough of the public, get them to vote on your issue, and politics will evolve at light speed.

Her delivery is exactly what's needed. An angry, educated young woman (they called me young man at 14, so don't balk), being unpleasant about having her future stolen makes exponentially more impact to the audience she targets than a thousand dry, factual, statistic rich talks by scientists. (Those are a dime a dozen today) Kids telling their parents that when the shit hits the fan, the kids are tossing them in the swollen river, not supporting them through their old age, is exactly the kick in the face many need. Kids of today will blame adults of today for the future they live in. Adults of today clearly don't consider that enough.

Something is better than nothing, she's demanding something. She's 16, do you expect her to have all the answers? (Some feasible solutions would be nice) She's well ahead of the curve just understanding the severity of the problem. I'm sure if we listened to all her speeches she gives some suggestions of action we could take to move in the right direction, but I doubt any one person has answers that solve every major effect of climate change, much less all the secondary and tertiary effects. I certainly don't expect her, at that age, to do more than demand those in power take it seriously and find solutions....and act. Chastising a major polluter who walked away from the weak, insufficient Paris agreement is a good start if it works, but I agree it's only barely a start.

You should consider it, she got millions to March for her cause worldwide. Even if she is a willing tool for some adults, it's clear more adults are tools for her. Consider, she isn't talking to kids, she's talking to adults, and some at least are listening to her, not her parents.

Personally it disturbs me that emotional delivery like this is required for many to even consider the issue beyond "what does my political party say on this issue, that's what I say too." I wish scientific issues like climate change were immune to politics, propaganda, and emotion, but they aren't. That's why we're hosed imo, humans are too willing to be deceived if the lie is more pleasant than reality, and denying there's a problem or need for change is quite pleasant to lazy Americans, far easier than facing facts and implementing difficult solutions....until it's not at least, by which time it's far too late.

This isn't really true though and greatly understates how amazing this demo, and current AI actually is.

Saying the agents are obeying a set of human defined rules / freedoms / constraints and objective functions would lead one to imagine something more like video game AI.

Typically video game AI works on a set of weighted decisions and actions, where the weights, decisions and actions are defined by the developer; a more complex variation of:

if my health is low, move towards the health pack,
otherwise, move towards the opponent

In this demo, no such rules exist. It's not given any weights (health), rules (if health is low), nor any instructions (move towards health pack). I guess you could apply neural networks to traditional game AI to determine the weights for decision making (which are typically hard coded by the developer); but that would be far less interesting than what's actually happening here.

Instead, the agent is given a set of inputs, a set of available outputs, and a goal.

4 Inputs:
- Position of the agent itself
- Position and type (other agent, box, ramp) of objects within a limited forward facing conical view
- Position (but not type) of objects within a small radius around the agent
- Reward: Whether they are doing a good job or not

Note the agent is given no information about each type of object, or what they mean, or how they behave. You may as well call them A, B, C rather than agent, box, ramp.

3 Outputs:
- Move
- Grab
- Lock

Again, the agent knows nothing about what these mean, only that they can enable and disable each at any time. A good analogy is someone giving you a game controller for a game you've never played. The controller has a stick and two buttons and you figure out what they do by using them. It'd be accurate to call the outputs: stick, A, B rather than move, grab, lock.

Goal:
- Do a good job.

The goal is simply for the reward input to be maximised. A good analogy is saying 'good girl' or giving a treat to a dog that you are training when they do the right thing. It's up to the dog to figure out what it is that they're doing that's good.

The reward is entirely separate from the agent, and agent behaviour can be completely changed just by changing when the reward is given. The demo is about hide and seek, where the agents are rewarded for not being seen / seeing their opponent (and not leaving the play area). The agents also succeeded at other games, where the only difference to the agent was when the reward was given.

It isn't really different from physically building the same play space, dropping some rats in it, and rewarding them with cheese when they are hidden from their opponents - except rats are unlikely to figure out how to maximise their reward in such a 'complex' game.

Given this description of how the AI actually works, the fact they came up with complex strategies like blocking doors, ramp surfing, taking the ramp to stop their opponents from ramp surfing, and just the general cooperation with other agents, without any code describing any of those things - is pretty amazing.

You can find out more about how the agents were trained, and other exercises they performed here:

https://openai.com/blog/emergent-tool-use/

I think Aden needs to meet Sheldon Cooper.

Lol. As usual, when argument one falls apart like a tissue paper submarine, you just move on to stupid dishonest red herring argument number two without pause.

In context, I was explaining why one shouldn't answer questions by police as if they were just trying to help and as if answering truthfully is never going to hurt you, which is a position any half decent lawyer would agree with....and what I said was
"If you believe they are there just to help you, cooperate. The prisons are full of [innocent] people who did just that. They are not normal humans, they are authorities looking for infractions."

Your dishonesty is on full display and it shows clearly you are nothing but a troll.

@bobknight33 Honestly, how can a reasonable person say that they cooperated fully when Trump refused to testify except through written statement?

How can you look at this section and say that the report found nothing?

Vol. 1, Page 33 https://nyti.ms/2VfXJWf

Barr's job was to muddy the waters and give a whitewashed version of events before the report was released, and to give Trump a head start by giving him the report right away but delaying it's release giving him more time to muddy waters, not to clear things up.

Mueller included a truck load of criminal dirt on Trump for congress and other venues to make use of. High crimes and misdemeanors, both. 12 classified/secret investigations based on that information are happening right now, and certainly there will be more.

Tons of collusion in the report, dozens of instances, but thanks to insane levels of incompetence, no criminal conspiracy with Russia, but not for lack of trying, they were just too dumb to get it done, and or too dumb to know they were committing crimes/treason. The report was clear, they conspired, they colluded, but he couldn't prove they knew it was a crime because they are all so incompetent.

Yes, collusion and illegal obstruction, clearly.

Refused to meet, refused to turn over documents, begrudgingly answered all written questions with "i dunno, I don't remember, I don't recall..." and instructed subordinates to do the same....hardly cooperation.

Mueller’s job was to muddy the waters, not clear it up..

If Mueller found criminal dirt on Trump He would have included it. 30 $million nothing burger. Free at last. Free at last. But Democrats can't let a free man free. He must be punished. We will find a way if only to drag his name through the dirt for another 6 years.

ZERO collusion. No illegal obstruction. Trump - Bitch and moan-- yes. Yell and scream - yes. But when Muller asked for documents or testimony 100% un-obstruction cooperation. Except for a personal meeting-- Which any good attorney would tell you not to.




Democrats/ Main stream media can't admit they lost, again.

Left Shark almost didn't want to cooperate.