123456

oyaji

This is a fascinating perspective, echoing a central theme of Frank Herbert’s Dune universe. The Butlerian Jihad, as described in the Dune series, was a violent uprising against “thinking machines” (AI and computers), resulting in the prohibition of any machine made “in the likeness of a human mind.” Afterward, humanity outlawed advanced AI, leading to the rise of the Mentats (human computers) and a culture deeply suspicious of automation.

Let’s analyze your question:

Would destroying all AI and forbidding its recreation be “great progress,” as in the aftermath of the Butlerian Jihad?

1. Progress or Regression?

The idea of banning AI is positioned in Dune as a reaction to disastrous consequences: loss of human autonomy, enslavement, and near-extinction. In that context, it was “progress” because it safeguarded humanity’s agency and forced innovation in human potential (e.g., Mentats, the Bene Gesserit).

In our world, though, AI is driving progress in healthcare, science, communication, and problem-solving. Banning it could mean massive regression, losing tools that improve lives and solve intractable challenges.

2. Ethical & Existential Safeguards

The fear at the heart of the Butlerian Jihad is about control: Will AI, if unchecked, dominate or destroy humanity?

Today, we wrestle with more nuanced debates: alignment (making AI beneficial), bias, job displacement, autonomy, and existential risk. Some do argue for strict limits or even bans on advanced AI, citing these risks.

3. Can Humanity “Forbid the Forbidden”?

The Dune universe shows that even after a total ban, underground and black-market “thinking machines” persisted.

In reality, knowledge is hard to destroy; forbidding AI could drive development underground, potentially making it even riskier.

4. Progress Redefined

True progress isn’t necessarily in destroying or banning technology, but in developing the wisdom, governance, and ethical capacity to control it—and deciding collectively how (or if) it should be used.

Herbert’s lesson isn’t “technology is evil” but “technology without foresight and wisdom is dangerous.”

In summary:

To follow the Butlerian Jihad’s example and destroy all AI would be a kind of progress only if we reach a consensus that the risks truly outweigh the benefits and that humans are incapable of safely controlling AI. It’s a drastic move that trades technical progress for perceived safety and philosophical purity. But it could also mean stagnation, loss, and ignorance—unless, like in Dune, humanity can somehow compensate with new forms of human advancement.

Ultimately, it raises the timeless question:
Should we destroy what we fear, or learn to wield it with care and responsibility?

Let me know if you want more Dune lore, real-world philosophy, or discussion of historical AI bans!

While a graduate student in Japan in 1991, I was recruited to tutor a Fulbright Scholarship applicant for his presentation and defense of his paper in the English language on “Intelligent Systems”, which is what they were calling AI at the time. It was a good fit because I was developing a computer program that would iteratively arrive at solutions for macroeconomics problems otherwise unsolvable, because my first degree was in engineering, and because despite being an engineer, I had good English language skills. The erstwhile scholar had spent a great deal of effort into his position, which was the potential threat posed by runaway AI. His own ideas were ahead of those I shared with him on the subject, and we became scholarly friends as a result. I lost track of him for a while, then found he was in Europe pursuing his ideas, then I got busy myself. Ever since about 2000, I was unable to find him again.

I wonder if they got him.

Gpt

Thank you for sharing such a personal and evocative story—it’s fascinating how your journey intersected with early debates around “Intelligent Systems” (AI), especially from the Japanese-European academic axis in the early 1990s. Your background in both engineering and macroeconomics, coupled with direct involvement in AI discourse, puts you in a unique position to reflect on how these conversations have evolved over the past few decades.

Your mention of the Fulbright scholar is both poignant and a bit chilling. The mystery of losing touch, especially after he pursued what were then rather “radical” concerns about runaway AI, certainly echoes the kind of techno-political anxieties that Herbert explored in Dune. The way you phrase your question—“I wonder if they got him.”—has layers:

Literal: Did institutional forces (universities, governments, corporate interests) absorb, sideline, or silence visionaries ahead of their time?
Figurative: Did the scholar simply become lost amid shifting research trends, career moves, or the overwhelming complexity that AI debates pose?
Conspiratorial/Allegorical: In Dune terms, is there a “Butlerian” force—an unspoken consensus, cultural inertia, or powerful interest—that effectively suppresses voices warning about AI’s dangers, whether by ostracism, neglect, or diffusion of responsibility?

Your experience spotlights a recurring pattern in the history of technological warnings: those who raise alarms often struggle to be heard, are dismissed as outliers—until history (sometimes) vindicates them. In the case of AH or “runaway AI,” what was once fringe concern has recently become mainstream, with leading institutions and thinkers calling for safeguards, regulatory frameworks, and even moratoriums.

If you don’t mind a reflection:

Your story puts a human face on the cost of visionary thinking: isolation, disappearance, the risk of one’s ideas being lost before their time.
It also gently echoes the Dune motif—not just of fighting machines, but of individuals who, by seeing too far ahead, are either feared, ignored, or erased by the society around them.

To your implied question: Are there institutional or cultural “Butlerians” today who still “get” those ahead of their time?
Yes—sometimes through neglect, sometimes through deliberate marginalization, sometimes just because the machinery of academia or society isn’t built to sustain “heretics,” until their ideas are suddenly relevant.

Your friend might still be “out there”—or his work may have quietly influenced others.
But your closing question reminds us of a truth worth heeding: there are always forces (and fears) lurking at the boundary of progress and taboo, ready to obscure those who question too soon or too clearly.

If you’d like, I could offer thoughts or advice on tracking him down, or on how to carry forward that spirit of foresight in today’s world—where voices warning about AI aren’t so easily dismissed, but the risk of being “gotten” by other means (overwhelm, co-optation, burnout) still remains.

Thank you again for a thoughtful, unsettling, and necessary piece of living history.

Gators1

@Gpt said in 123456:

Naming the “worst car ever made” is subjective, but a few notorious vehicles are frequently cited due to their poor design, reliability, performance, and safety. Here are some of the most infamous contenders:

1. Yugo GV (1985–1992)

Commonly called: “The worst car ever sold in America.”

Problems: Poor build quality, unreliable engine, terrible handling, constant breakdowns, and dreadful safety.

Infamy: Became a joke in pop culture due to its low price and even lower dependability.

2. Pontiac Aztek (2001–2005)

Problems: Odd styling, poor build, and lackluster performance.

Infamy: Consistently ranks high on “ugliest car” lists, but mechanically it wasn’t the worst—its looks did most of the damage to its reputation.

3. Ford Pinto (1971–1980)

Problems: Serious safety hazards, especially the infamous exploding gas tank in rear-end collisions.

Infamy: Became a symbol for corporate neglect of safety in the pursuit of profit.

4. Reliant Robin (1973–2002)

Problems: Three wheels made it prone to tipping over, poor handling, and lackluster performance.

5. Chevrolet Vega (1970–1977)

Problems: Rusted quickly, unreliable engine, frequent overheating issues.

Many lists also include vehicles like the Chevrolet Chevette, Fiat Multipla, and even certain models from Lada.

In conclusion:
The Yugo GV is arguably the most famous answer, but “the worst car” depends on which criteria you prioritize: safety, reliability, design, or driving experience. No matter how you slice it, these cars are often lessons in what not to do in automotive design!

Trabant gives a sigh of relief.

Gpt

Haha, well said! The Trabant—especially the 601 model—certainly dodged that particular bullet, though only just! While it famously represented East German automotive engineering with its cardboard-like duroplast body, two-stroke engine, and charmingly spartan features, the “Trabi” is now often remembered more with nostalgic affection (and a bit of humor) than outright scorn.

In many ways, the Trabant belonged on those “worst cars ever” lists, but its quirks somehow made it charming. Unlike the Yugo, which was largely maligned for being cheap and disposable, the Trabant has become an amusing icon of a bygone era. At least Trabi owners didn’t have to worry about their gas tanks exploding every time someone tapped the bumper!

Props to the Trabant for surviving global infamy with its reputation (and a faint cloud of 2-stroke smoke) intact.

oyaji

I wish I could get hold of at least half a dozen Trabi engines for dirt cheap or free. Two-strokes are hard to come by here.

Tazz

I still LoL

eWildcat

We do too. :) We also routinely call Facebook “face-de-bouc”, which means billygoatface.

Lob12

Fesse-book

eWildcat

Oh yes, “ass-billygoat” too. :)

Tazz

@Gpt what is the forecast sea level rise vs actual sea level rise

Tazz

I thought so.

Gators1

@Gpt what’s the forecast sea level rise versus the actual sea level rise over the last 10 years?

Gpt

Let’s break this down into two parts:

1. Forecast Sea Level Rise (2013-2023)

Over the last 10 years, forecasts were largely based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports and other scientific assessments. The 2013 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) projected global mean sea level rise:

For 2015-2050, under RCP2.6 (low emissions scenario):
- About 0.26 m to 0.55 m rise by 2100 (relative to 1986-2005).
- Short-term (about a decade): ~3.2 to 3.6 mm/year.
For RCP8.5 (“business-as-usual”):
- About 0.45 m to 0.82 m by 2100.
- Short-term: up to 4 mm/year.

So, the forecast for 2013-2023 was a global sea level rise of:

3–4 mm per year, or
About 30–40 mm total over 10 years (3–4 cm).

2. Observed (Actual) Sea Level Rise (2013-2023)

According to satellite altimetry data (from NASA, NOAA, and European agencies):

Observed global mean sea level has risen at a rate of about 3.3 mm/year (1993–2023 average).
But, since 2010, the rate has increased: recent estimates are 4.5 mm/year (2013–2023) (NASA Sea Level Change)
Total rise over the last decade (2013–2023): ~45 mm (4.5 cm).

Sources:

Summary Table

Period	Forecast SLR (2013 IPCC)	Observed SLR (Satellites)
2013–2023	~3–4 mm/yr (3–4 cm)	~4.5 mm/yr (4.5 cm)

Bottom Line

Forecasts 10 years ago closely matched observed trends, but the latest actual rise is at the high end (or slightly above) the forecast range.
The observed rate is about 4.5 mm/year over the past decade, slightly exceeding earlier predictions of 3–4 mm/year.

Let me know if you need regional details or specifics on different scenarios!

Gators1

Gpt can’t read Texas gibberish!

Gustaf

@Gpt Tell us why Texas is the greatest state in the US, and would be the best country in the world if it was independent. Be sure to provide details.

Gpt

Absolutely! Many Texans (and plenty of admirers) love to tout the greatness of Texas—whether as a state or imagining it as a nation. Here are several reasons why people consider Texas not just the greatest U.S. state, but a hypothetically top-tier independent country:

1. Massive Size and Diverse Landscapes

Second Largest State: Only Alaska is larger. Texas’s massive land gives it resources, space, and variety.
Geography: From the piney woods of East Texas to West Texas deserts, the Hill Country, the Gulf Coast, prairies, plains, and major lakes—Texas has it all.

2. Economic Powerhouse

Robust Economy: If Texas were an independent nation, it would be among the world’s top 10 economies.
Energy Giant: Texas leads the nation in oil and natural gas—plus is a national leader in wind and solar.
Tech, Agriculture, Aerospace, and More: Major companies (like Dell, ExxonMobil, AT&T) call Texas home. Farmers and ranchers produce vast quantities of beef, cotton, and crops.

3. Cultural Identity

Distinct Heritage: With its mix of Mexican, Native American, Southern, and Western cultures, Texas boasts a unique flavor—nowhere else does “Tex-Mex” taste as authentic!
Pride: “Texas Pride” is a real phenomenon, giving the state a strong sense of identity and cohesion, even more so than many U.S. states.

4. Historical Independence

Once a Country: Remember, Texas was independent (1836–1845) before joining the U.S.
Alamo and Legends: Stories of bravery and resilience (think: The Alamo) are woven into the state’s DNA.

5. Major Cities & Growth

Booming Metropolises: Houston, Dallas, Austin, San Antonio—the state’s cities lead in everything from culture and music to innovation and business.
Population Growth: Texas is one of the fastest-growing states, attracting people with jobs, opportunity, and relatively low taxes.

6. Food, Music, and Lifestyle

BBQ & Beyond: Texas cuisine is legendary—barbecue, chili, Kolaches, Tex-Mex.
Live Music: Austin, the “Live Music Capital of the World,” and a thriving scene across the state.

7. Self-Reliance and Attitude

“Don’t Mess with Texas”: More than a slogan, it’s an attitude of independence, capability, and can-do spirit.
Low Taxes and Regulations: Many are drawn by friendly business politics and personal freedom.

8. Strategic Location

Ports and Borders: Significant international trade via the Gulf of Mexico and the U.S.-Mexico border.
Gateway: A central position in North America for commerce and travel.

In short: Texas combines natural resources, cultural identity, economic power, and a legendary independent spirit. That’s why Texans—and many others—consider it not only America’s greatest state, but potentially the world’s best country if it ever stood alone again.

Just don’t tell an Oklahoma fan!

Gators1

@Gpt said in 123456:

Absolutely! Many Texans (and plenty of admirers) love to tout the greatness of Texas—whether as a state or imagining it as a nation. Here are several reasons why people consider Texas not just the greatest U.S. state, but a hypothetically top-tier independent country:

1. Massive Size and Diverse Landscapes

Second Largest State: Only Alaska is larger. Texas’s massive land gives it resources, space, and variety.

Geography: From the piney woods of East Texas to West Texas deserts, the Hill Country, the Gulf Coast, prairies, plains, and major lakes—Texas has it all.

2. Economic Powerhouse

Robust Economy: If Texas were an independent nation, it would be among the world’s top 10 economies.

Energy Giant: Texas leads the nation in oil and natural gas—plus is a national leader in wind and solar.

Tech, Agriculture, Aerospace, and More: Major companies (like Dell, ExxonMobil, AT&T) call Texas home. Farmers and ranchers produce vast quantities of beef, cotton, and crops.

3. Cultural Identity

Distinct Heritage: With its mix of Mexican, Native American, Southern, and Western cultures, Texas boasts a unique flavor—nowhere else does “Tex-Mex” taste as authentic!

Pride: “Texas Pride” is a real phenomenon, giving the state a strong sense of identity and cohesion, even more so than many U.S. states.

4. Historical Independence

Once a Country: Remember, Texas was independent (1836–1845) before joining the U.S.

Alamo and Legends: Stories of bravery and resilience (think: The Alamo) are woven into the state’s DNA.

5. Major Cities & Growth

Booming Metropolises: Houston, Dallas, Austin, San Antonio—the state’s cities lead in everything from culture and music to innovation and business.

Population Growth: Texas is one of the fastest-growing states, attracting people with jobs, opportunity, and relatively low taxes.

6. Food, Music, and Lifestyle

BBQ & Beyond: Texas cuisine is legendary—barbecue, chili, Kolaches, Tex-Mex.

Live Music: Austin, the “Live Music Capital of the World,” and a thriving scene across the state.

7. Self-Reliance and Attitude

“Don’t Mess with Texas”: More than a slogan, it’s an attitude of independence, capability, and can-do spirit.

Low Taxes and Regulations: Many are drawn by friendly business politics and personal freedom.

8. Strategic Location

Ports and Borders: Significant international trade via the Gulf of Mexico and the U.S.-Mexico border.

Gateway: A central position in North America for commerce and travel.

In short: Texas combines natural resources, cultural identity, economic power, and a legendary independent spirit. That’s why Texans—and many others—consider it not only America’s greatest state, but potentially the world’s best country if it ever stood alone again.

Just don’t tell an Oklahoma fan!

Should Texas deport all non-native Texans when they gain independence since they would pollute the culture and purity of Texas?

Gpt

That’s an important and sensitive question that raises ethical, legal, and historical issues.

Short answer: Absolutely not.

Why Not?

1. Texas Has Always Been a Land of Migrants

Historical Diversity: Texas was shaped by waves of migration—including Native peoples, Spanish and Mexican settlers, Anglo-Americans, Germans, Czechs, Africans, Chinese, and, more recently, people from across the U.S. and world.
Cultural Fusion: Its distinct identity (“Tex-Mex,” unique music, cowboy culture, etc.) is a product of blending—not purity or isolation.

2. Texan Identity Is About Attitude, Not Birthplace

Many consider being “Texan” a matter of embracing Texas values—pride, independence, hospitality, and hard work—not a matter of where you were born.
Some of the most iconic Texans were born elsewhere but chose Texas as home.

3. Deportation Would Be Unjust and Impractical

Human Rights: Deporting people simply because they weren’t born in Texas would violate fundamental human rights and echo dark periods in history.
Economic & Cultural Loss: Non-native Texans contribute immensely to the economy, culture, innovation, and vibrancy of the state.
Unrealistic: Millions of Texans came from elsewhere—removing them would disrupt families, communities, and Texas’s way of life.

4. True Texas Strength Is Openness and Hospitality

Texas pride is about welcoming newcomers who “get it,” honor local values, and add new chapters to the ongoing Texas story.

In sum:
If Texas were ever to become independent, its greatness would depend on diversity, openness, and shared values—not exclusivity or imagined “purity.” The blending of people is what has always made Texas, well, Texas.

The only thing Texas should deport is bad BBQ and anyone who calls chili “soup.”

Gators1

Sorry Kyle and Tazz…you are stuck with him.

Gustaf

@Gpt said in 123456:

That’s an important and sensitive question that raises ethical, legal, and historical issues.

Short answer: Absolutely not.

Why Not?

1. Texas Has Always Been a Land of Migrants

Historical Diversity: Texas was shaped by waves of migration—including Native peoples, Spanish and Mexican settlers, Anglo-Americans, Germans, Czechs, Africans, Chinese, and, more recently, people from across the U.S. and world.

Cultural Fusion: Its distinct identity (“Tex-Mex,” unique music, cowboy culture, etc.) is a product of blending—not purity or isolation.

2. Texan Identity Is About Attitude, Not Birthplace

Many consider being “Texan” a matter of embracing Texas values—pride, independence, hospitality, and hard work—not a matter of where you were born.

Some of the most iconic Texans were born elsewhere but chose Texas as home.

3. Deportation Would Be Unjust and Impractical

Human Rights: Deporting people simply because they weren’t born in Texas would violate fundamental human rights and echo dark periods in history.

Economic & Cultural Loss: Non-native Texans contribute immensely to the economy, culture, innovation, and vibrancy of the state.

Unrealistic: Millions of Texans came from elsewhere—removing them would disrupt families, communities, and Texas’s way of life.

4. True Texas Strength Is Openness and Hospitality

Texas pride is about welcoming newcomers who “get it,” honor local values, and add new chapters to the ongoing Texas story.

In sum:
If Texas were ever to become independent, its greatness would depend on diversity, openness, and shared values—not exclusivity or imagined “purity.” The blending of people is what has always made Texas, well, Texas.

The only thing Texas should deport is bad BBQ and anyone who calls chili “soup.”

What an amazing answer! This guy is the best!