Why are you feeding itera?
Your brand of trolling is much less transparent. 
I hadn’t realized but Bill Gates, Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking, all agreed “maybe allocate more resources now to prevent runaway AI from becoming a concern”. You guys missed it while you were distracted looking at expected form, classic tunnel vision. Bill Gates specifically embarrassed himself…
“First the machines will do a lot of jobs for us and not be super intelligent. That should be positive if we manage it well. A few decades after that though the intelligence is strong enough to be a concern. I agree with Elon Musk and some others on this and don’t understand why some people are not concerned.”
Bill do I even need to respond? Even in weak form (unintelligent) they are already ruthlessly effective (which is what matters). Regarding your other statements, see Trump and Brexit, people do not feel it has been managed well, and they are very concerned. You just have not realized, nor have they, what they are concerned about.
As I see it, you consider value added to the topic when people agree with you.
When I think that you’re writing something stupid, I see no reason to be prolix or clever; I simply tell you that you’re writing something stupid.
If you think that that adds no value to the thread . . . well . . . I’m not surprised. It would take a lot of effort (and humility) on your part to admit that you’ve written something stupid.
You constantly complain that you want to see serious analysis, all the while making exaggerated statements and generalizations. Pardon me if I don’t see those as serious analysis and simply mention that they’re wrong.
Sheesh.
Hmm I was thinking and I guess I’ll reluctantly write the problem/answer down formally and send it to these knuckleheads. I did a project once for Bill, and my ex-boss worked with Hawking. The problem is, these guys already failed the IQ test, so it’s not likely they will see the correct solution if presented. Add to that they are already publicly invested in the wrong answer. And even worse they are employed by the corporate AI (while those who are not have no power). It always comes back to; persistent problems persist due to reasons. 
I have correctly diagnosed PA. Any donations in thanks can be sent to the charity of your choice.
PA is implementing a formidable forum strategy. He’s bashing the mods to protect himself. Now, if he gets banned, the mods could face backlash from some members of the community, putting themselves in an uncomfortable position. PA’s 1.5 friends will say he was banned for speaking up against the mods when he was actually banned for dragging down the site and being an asshat.
Well played but PA is not the Sun Tzu he thinks he is.
Who would you nominate to replace them?
You are probably experiencing shock that “normal” people come up with stuff the “celebrated smart people” did not see, this happens, thousands of years of recorded history on it. The thinkers of the established thoughts usually deny, until one day the correct thinking finally becomes the established thinking.
Established: having been in existence for a long time and therefore recognized and generally accepted.
Amusing, it is true I am a master strategist, thank you. However I am not actually “bashing the mods”, I am objectively pointing out their shortcomings, only after being bashed myself (defined as attacked without basis or provocation). My defensive attacks do have basis, and everyone knows it. But to credit appropriately, these strategies come from Lao Tzu.
You are correct that people are correct about plenty of things others did not see happening. I would like to see the hit/miss ratio of those predictions people make as I can imagine that would make your analysis have a pretty low weight afterwards. Again, the whole delusions of grandeur comes in to play because you assume that you are one of the special few and are absolutely correct. Thanks for a confirming my diagnoses.
The “hit/miss” ratio would be extremely low. But you are assuming my theory is randomly sampled from the population of dummy ill-thought-thru theories. I have such a high ratio because I spend years on analyses, in this case 20yrs, before I open my fat mouth.
That’s not actually correct, my confidence is based partially on my historic hit/miss performance, I do in fact keep track. The ratio is high because of the above, hundreds or thousands of theories are abandoned for each one that I end up “calling”. That’s how I win at stocks too.
You have, in a nutshell, defined your greatest weakness.
You believe that you’re the paradigm of objectivity when, in fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Your memory is selective: you readily forget your own transgressions – or foist the blame on others whom you claim have misinterpreted your innocent observations – so that you can cloak yourself in this mantle of victimhood.
You’re probably correct about one thing: I suspect that everyone here knows which attacks have a basis and which don’t. You’re most definitely incorrect in assuming that only yours are the former.
^ Glad to see you have started writing full sentences/paragraphs complete with proper punctuation. Looks like I have had a positive effect on the mods behavior and quality of posting. 
You’re silly.
Rumor has it PA was alive back in ancient times. He used to tell people his calculations proved the moon revolved around the earth. He then proceeded to tell them the same calculations also showed that the moon was actually attracted to him & that is why it revolved around the earth.
so… PA is America’s problem?
Spoken like a college kid that is too young to remember the Soviet Union and other failed attempts at a utopian society free of corporations and greed. Wikipedia Soviet Union and see what you find…it might blow your mind.
Oh, and your rambling pseudo-intellectual post could have been summarized in about 2 sentences rather than 7 painstaking paragraphs of nonsense.
That’s pretty weak thinking. You basically just lumped it into the box of “some naive person who thinks a perfect world exists”, so you can dismiss without having to actually think.
Oh, and saying ‘…this is why Stephen Hawking is an idiot…’ is not a good way to be taken seriously. Granted, he does look like he died about 30 years ago and that some Weekend at Bernie’s stuff is going on there though…so you get partial credit.
I never said I wanted to be taken seriously, I said I had the correct answer. Being taken seriously means saying things which “sound true”, which means being wrong.