With persons you can assume they won't lie all the time, with corporations you can assume they will lie some of the time, and with AI you can safely assume it will lie.
I pondered on this a bit and this looks a bit different than I originally was thinking.
Have you ever watched one of those crime shows where someone commits a crime that's an act of passion or action with little to no thought behind it? The police put them in a room and all of a sudden the individual is a stream of consciousness that makes little to no sense to an outside observer. They are stuck in first level thinking, they don't have time to think deeply after the panicked themselves. They are in their current position (not free) and attempting to reach their goal (free) by gradient descent. What they actually say doesn't matter as long as they believe it gets them closer to their goal.
This is what a chatbot is. Its goal is to output text that follows the input prompt you entered by gradient descent. A single prompt and output is level 1 thinking (barring some newer models).
This is why both humans and AI need something else. We have level 2 thinking and AI has harnesses or systems that otherwise look at the text it wants to output and compares them to another list of unstated but assumed goals.
Let's face it, UK never was "full member", for all means. But that's beside the actual point: the German/French euro-skeptics see their countries paying the eastern block a lot of money, sees that same block totally ungrateful about it (ooga booga colonialism), but at the same time don't notice their own employers happy to have such markets at their fingertips - because said markets grab also jobs at their expense, again something the eastern block actively ignores. At the same times the ruling parties everywhere won't touch a running system (even when it's barely running) to not lose their hard won privileges, and the rightwing grows claiming imaginary but heartwarming solutions.
Whoever works with, or chooses Java, is not doing it for the language itself, be it beautiful or not. Java has a huge ecosystem, from battle tested integrations to optimized images to build pipelines to whatever, so at the same you're buying access to all this world (yes, more than an environment). And of course transferable skills. I'm not saying Java is alone offering this, also not saying every feature is the best, but you can have them all, and even choose from different options.
Java's ecosystem is lingering since Oracle brought the language, and it's at the point where you should really look if the things you want to use are still in the state of the art, or if they felt behind every other language.
And if you are starting from scratch, whatever part of the ecosystem you use, I'm not optimist on its situation improving with time.
I use Java for hobby projects, I think it's design choices make it a nice minimalist language for "classic OOP" style: dynamic dispatch, encapsulation etc.
Nowadays a lot of code is written with mostly procedural style with some functional characteristics, I wouldn't use Java for that.
Okay, you want my frank opinion on that? The job of EU politicians is to either:
1) "suck up to Russia" (or let's put it politely: have a working economic relationship with Russia)
2) actually END THE WAR, as in honestly say to people that we're going to war, because that's exactly what EU sanctions are going to accomplish, and understand that this is what 10% or more of the economy will be dedicated to that for let's say a decade, and of course, missiles will be coming in for that time.
I would even go so far to say that it seems to me likely in the extreme that Germany, and by that I mean Schroeder and Merkel, promised Russia they would be allowed to conquer Ukraine (look at their UN votes after the Crimea annexation for example) ... and obviously they didn't deliver, and that, combined with Ukraine actually managing to save themselves against German wishes, is what's making the Ukraine war happen.
The reaction of Germany to this? To prepare for war, of course. Note: war, as in marching German soldiers into war. NOT defending Ukraine.
Like in any war I've ever seen, all actors in the Ukraine war have despicable behavior. They're not "equal" morally in any shape or form, but none of the actors are behaving morally, even judged by their own morals. Russia is by far the worst, then Germany, and Ukraine is mostly a victim (but that hasn't stopped them from making a few very questionable decisions either)
My problem with sanctions is the following. Russia, when push comes to shove, is trading oil with the EU because it economically benefits them. Why do they go to war? Frankly, to avoid these taxes. If you look deep down, that's the reason.
Let's assume sanctions aren't more than Russia can handle (as in, strong enough to bring the Russian state down), and EU sanctions aren't, then what do sanctions actually do?
They increase Russia's reasons to go to war with the EU while still allowing Russia's army to become stronger. Increasing both the ability and the appetite of the Kremlin to attack. Hence, why I'm saying the sanctions are effectively trying to get Russia to start a war with the EU.
And you're not telling me anyone who's good enough of a negotiator to get into parliament or government doesn't understand this DAMN well.
Germany is purposefully causing a war between the EU and Russia because
1) it doesn't require a budget item to be approved. It's cheap.
2) they don't look like that's what they're doing. Especially not to young Germans (who will be doing all the dying), in fact they look like they're doing something to end war and get to peace
And the worst of it is: Ukraine might actually save Germany's ass, and do the dying for them. That was never part of the plan, but they'll take it, of course (while STILL saving on the expense of supporting Ukraine, of course)
How is Russia's army becoming stronger? They have lost so much people and equipment. Why would they attack EU when they can't defeat Ukraine after so many years? Are you suggesting they will perform a suicide attack against EU, cause as much damage as they can, and get absolutely destroyed in return?
Russia is making a profit under EU sanctions with oil sales to the EU, especially to Greece and Spain. If they're not using that to become stronger they are complete morons.
Currently russian war is eating close to 50% of their federal budget. That's WW2 levels of militarism for nearly zero gain (current battlefield status, not 2022-2025) and huge manpower and infrastructure losses.
> Germany is purposefully causing a war between the EU and Russia because
No, Germany does what it does because it has no strong or even good leaders and failed to adapt to current circumstances. There is no purpose.
I can't even thank you enough. Just for speaking the truth about the complexity of it all.
Politicians are failing because majority can't even acknowledge the complexity. More worried about saving themselves then speaking candidly. There are a few that do, but sabotaged by the rest.
Please remind me quickly, who invaded who already? Germany what? Maybe in 1939, but definitely not in 2014. And there was no Ribbentrop-Molotov pact between Merkel and Putin, let's stop inventing things for the sake of an imaginary argument. So on short: Russia invaded the Ukraine because why not, the Eastern Europe and more is now on fire thanks to that, and I must read here funny numbers and how Russia doesn't like sanctions (duh, that's the whole point of sanctions).
You want to assign blame through an absolute moral standard? My God. The problem is that this is war. Nobody is behaving morally, in an absolute standard (frankly even outside of war that's the case). And I can't believe a rational person would actually say that:
"So on short: Russia invaded the Ukraine because why not, ..."
Believe it or not, Putin is a mass murderer. But even a mass murderer needs a good reason to spend 70%+ of a country's total income on destroying everything in sight for 8 years flat.
And as for guilt. "Why not" in your argument, includes France, US, UK and Germany vetoing any kind of serious reaction to Russia invading and annexing Crimea despite having signed agreements they would ... and then modifying those agreements afterward. You call that moral? Especially given that it's obviously exactly this that set off the rearmament spiral that the EU is now joining.
reply