Spain has been championing global governance structures and rule based cooperation in the international space, instead of just the rule of the strongest, which other actors are being vocal about this?

Or in other words, why are we so good at building and running countries and so bad at building and enforcing international institutions?

In line with this, just saw @miniminuteman.bsky.social 's video and it made me a happy man. Trust in humanity restored:

youtu.be/mZzqQvx_2Aw?...

Do you think the average US citizen would (roughly) guess those to be the figures for the 1%?

I am not indeed, I wonder what is the number people in the US would typically estimate for the 1%? (As opposed to the true figure)

I wont ask what the US 1% salary is because I could google that and get the official numbers, but I do wonder what people typically think that number is?

Is that a low number in the US?

Why is this conversation dead today? What can be done to change it?

I feel like these topics end up being followed by an "elite" of sorts. I may be wrong tho.

Do you have any ideas to reach regular Joes too?

Think the cashier at the supermarket, guy selling fruits at marché de Midi or an Uber driver.

Global problems (*) Global answers

This is awesome, thank you!

Im asking this before reading, so feel free to refer me back to the article, but if we measure AGI by capacity rather than by a definition, then which capacity are we aiming at? Are we waiting for complete authomation and UBI before talking about AGI?

Okay I do get the nuance now. I feel like its interesting to try and get to establish what a system "knows" and doesnt "know".

I feel like ethologists and people working in animal cognition should jump in the wider AGI benchmark conversation

I understand! But how does that relate to what I mentioned (there are humans with their general intelligence which do not know they are bullshitting)?

Also, Im extremely happy I got a reply from you 🤣, - Obligatory fanboy comment over -

I agree with the sentiment, it ends up being a matter of definition in the end!

I kind of disagree with part 2 though, LLMs like the ones we have bullshit us all the time (they hallucinate) but are still very helpful as a tool (even if they need our oversight).

What is a non science question though? Is there any question that cannot be explored through a scientific lense?