/sci/ - Science & Math

Everyone who works in STEM or who has ever worked in STEM has contributed to the downfall of society. Scientists and engineers are the dredges dragging down humanity.

Things only might get better for humans with two technologies: AGI and CRISPR. All other technologies are to reach a point in time to develop those two.

Steam engine? Made things worse. Locomotive? Made things worse. Nitrogen doping? Made things worse.

Everyone in STEM is evil by complacency.

>>12603698
>environments with more than about 200 people
Uncle Ted talks about this too. It's called oversocialization.

>>12586693
He looks to be around 5'9"–5'10" judging from pic related. Only manlet size if you're memeing

They need to embrace that they are contributing to the destruction of humanity and the loss of all of our privacy and freedom.

I'm gonna press my undo all of science button, convince me not to.

Is this just a meme or the people on this board unironically like Ted? if yes, why do you like him?

>>11179842
Humans are increasingly living lifestyles they hadn't evolved to live. We see physical examples in obesity and heart disease, and mental examples in the rise of autism, bipolar disorder, and even gender dysphoria. These were present before modern times, but much rarer, as humanity's environment was much more natural. While the physical issues can be fixed, the mental issues, gained through childhood, are irreversible.

Consider the following:

We have two Nation States, A and B, with approximately equal nuclear arsenals (offensive and defensive capabilities).

Nation State B's intelligence apparatus determines a high probability that a new Artificial intelligence technology has been developed in Nation State A. They determine that this technology has the potential to dramatically undermine their own second strike capability. They believe this to be true with a high probability, although they are not 100% sure.

Nation State B is forced to choose one of two options. Given their limited information, they must decide quickly, as they have no way of ruling out the possibility that this technology isn't already deployed and ready.

One, they wait, and become sitting ducks in the hopes that Nation State A does not launch a first strike.

Two, they launch a preemptive strike, unprovoked. If the AI technology is truly capable of rendering their second strike capability useless, this is their only opportunity to launch a strike. Shoot em or lose em.

If Nation State B perceives an existential threat from Nation State A, it will have no choice but to launch an unprovoked nuclear strike.

Thus, the mere probability of a destabilizing AI technology leads to nuclear war.

Note the following details:
1. The AI doesn't need to ever actually be used
2. We don't even need to consider AGI. A task specific weak AI is more than sufficient.
3. The AI doesn't even actually need to exist, simply a convincing implied threat is enough to provoke war.
4. We don't require an ongoing war or conflict. We can consider this scenario in a peace time/cold war.
5. An on going conflict, even a proxy war or small scale conflict, simply further constricts Nation B to elect the preemptive strike.

>>10624876
Ted Kaczynski was accepted into the graduate programs of these schools and he had a 3.12 undergraduate GPA

How did he get admitted into the grad schools of U.C. Berkeley, University of Michigan, and University of Chicago with a 3.12 GPA?