Most condoms taste pretty bad (unless of course some that are actually made to taste ~~good~~ ok-ish).

Nice though experiment, but doesn't hold up to scrutiny on many levels (not meant in a condescending way, just to spinn that thought experiment further)

First, we can't even agree on how/what to exactly measure with penis length. Even if we fixed that, the actual distribution itself doesn't have buckets (like size ranges) but would contain all data points individually. If we measure with unreasonably high precision and assume that penis length is a real (in a mathematical sense) number than there is a 0% chance that two people have the same penis length and there would be no person that has an exactly average penis length.

Stepping back from this thought experiment, there is data for penis length and the standard deviation is wider than most people would expect, it's far from 90% being average unless your average bucket is something like 5-20cm

Aerosols aren't gases in the classial sense and reflect sunlight. This works especially well high up in the atmosphere.

https://science.nasa.gov/science-research/earth-science/climate-science/aerosols-small-particles-with-big-climate-effects/

There are studies that collect data around volcano eruptions and coal power plants getting online and offline. Long story short: Climate is complicated; I'm not a climate scientist and not to be trusted; it would work great at cooling the planet; we definitely shouldn't do it (yet?) because it masks the temperature problem and could lead to us not reducing CO2 because we "wouldn't have to", but it could be a tool if we might be on the edge of a catastrophic runaway effect that causes too much water to evaporate into the atmosphere.

Update: Btw, you are right about dark particles low in the atmosphere, those typically warm the planet. It's mainly sulfur dioxide aerosols byproduct that cool the planet (also mentioned in the NASA article)

If they're at MY door, what else can be done but defend my life with my life?

That's what I meant with you wouldn't do anything. First you'd still have other options and if ICE is at your door and you start shooting at them it will probably kill you faster.

You sound pretty flippant with people's lives

That was not my intention. It totally get why nobody is doing anything, especially with guns, because of the consequences. I just pointed out that so many people in favor of armed civilians bring completely flawed arguments and now we actually see in action how useless a "regulated militia" is.

why don't you go grab a gun and suicide into an armed force for great justice?

Why would I? I don't have a gun and never argued in favor of armed civilians, because it's completely useless (and research shows that it only increases the chances of domestic violence and suicide). Maybe it wasn't useless at the time the constitution was written but the current situation shows that it is now. Besides that I live in Vienna.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country

America is top of the list yet nothing happens. Seems like those "to defend against rogue government" arguments are just talk anyway and the entire world told you that for years.

Looks like Americans are all talk and just keep the guns around just for a higher suicide rate and school shootings.

Yet nothing in the news, because Americans are all talk.

Why are the first two ifs in infix notation and the third isn't?

Interesting that Americans always argue that they need their guns in case the government goes rouge. So many comments say that they will get shot, because they absolutely look like kidnappers, yet nothing happens. Looks like you keep those guns around just for a higher suicide rate and school shootings.

I see what you mean but that's not what I thought China did. I thought they just declared every prisoner automatically an organ donor which would totally be fine IMHO.

I live in Europe (Austria) and the solitary-based health care system is amazing. Automatically declaring everybody a donor is the best thing you can do (in in that case there wouldn't even be a difference if you are a prisoner or not).

If you ask me we should even get rid of the option to opt out unless in well founded court approved exceptions. Opting out of being an organ donor is probably the most egocentric, selfish thing one could do. You are dead and you still want to deny helping others at literally no additional cost for you.

It also has practically the opposite effect of what you mentioned. If you only have a few organ donors and one is in a bad condition in a hospital there a probably a few people that hope they don't make it to get the organs. But if everybody is an organ donor the situation gets much simpler because there isn't this artificial scarcity.

Long story short, I haven't heard a single good argument for not being an organ donor except that people could care less about the paper work to opt-in. That's why the European opt-out system is way better, but many US citizens probably would call that communism :-)

LLMs are not AGI tough.

Exactly what I did and there also is a ICE number in the contact list (number stored a second time with the real name)

I didn't say they have no knowledge, quite the opposite. Here a quote from the comment you answered:

LLMs are extremely knowledgeable (as in they "know" a lot) but are completely dumb.

There is a subtle difference between intelligent and knowledgeable. LLM know a lot in that sense that they can remember a lot of things, but they are dumb in that sense that they are completely unable to draw conclusions and put that knowledge into action in any other means besides spitting out again what they once learned.

That's why LLMs can tell you a lot about about all different kinds of game theory about tic tac toe but can't draw/win that game consistently.

So knowing a lot and still being dumb is not a contradiction.