Recent content by BillTre

You are equating not having competition with a lot of things that are irrelevant to whether competition exists or not. This weird redefining makes me skeptical of your arguments. You also claim that AIs don't have needs for some reason while they obviously require certain things to function...

Here is a book that explains a lot of that bio. stuff: Competing for resources just means using the same resources. When resources are limited and multiple units are using them, it is a competition.

Your logic is unconvincing to me. However, if the trees were planted by humans for agricultural purposes it wouldn't be competition? It sounds to me like there are cases of competition you refuse to acknowledge for reasons unrelated to the actual competition for resources that is occurring...

It can easily be both. They are not exclusive. If large AI installations are not competing for water as a resource, then why this:

You don't have to anthropomorphize AI to see it is competing for particular resources. They are unrelated. As @jedishrfu pointed out they are competing for water (a resource of signicance) in Texas.

This could lead to a selection for smaller brains!

It may be that things like Hawaii's new law that is supposed to be a counter to Citizens United (keeping corporate money out of politics), will reduce to some degree those capitalist influences of which you speak.

Humans and AI systems have the possibility to be competing systems in an environment of limited resources. Where the use of both people (as communities) and large energy and water consuming sites in the same areas (areas supplied by some economically available source), competition will ensue...

I also liked the 2010 follow-up film. It was fun and cleared things up to a degree. It was of course not so ground breaking since 2001 was first. Aliens (vs. Alien) got around that by being a different kind of a film. intense action vs. a great suspense film.

There used to be a weekly photo competition for photos on a subject designated by the thread's originator. As I recall, votes (as likes or as a poll) were used to decide a weekly winner. This was fun but it probably took a fair amount of time and effort for the thread runner. He stopped at some...

Not that I have seen the response to your questions, however, as a non-physicist, I would say ask better questions or get a thicker skin. Science, done well will always have an aspect of contention. It is what gives its drive forward. There is an approach to asking question or making comments...

Enter some photo contests or take a photography course to get good feedback.

Different people will respond in different ways (like or dislike) to different art pieces.

Out of five can mean a lot of things. Is 1 ungodly awful? Is 3 average? Is 5 so good that only a handful in the universe meet the criteria?