John_A_Mandrake

Crustle, you know the drill... STONE TIME!!!

While I don't deny the potential benefits of it, I would also err on the side of caution. A good example of this is when Tony Stark created Ultron in the MCU but he separated himself into both Ultron and Vision. What you're envisioning is more akin to Vision, but what drives my caution is that; despite the good intentions in its creation, like with Stark, it could very easily be an Ultron instead. Not to mention the fact that a system without necessary connections that come from human experiences wouldn't even be aware of what humans, both as individuals and as a species, would want or need to progress. I do enjoy these kinds of hypothetical scenarios, though. So, feel free to speak more on your perspective. At least, a broadening of perspectives that stem from such conversations is rarely a bad thing.

Worse. while AI is better at thinking logically and can account for things humans can easily miss for various reasons, it can't understand emotions. Therefore, it can predict emotional responses... Something we humans are well known for.

I'd probably want to be a combination of Hit and Freiza... Hit's time stop ability is op(with the exception of Goku and the Z fighters' plot armor of course). Add that to Freiza's potential and you've practically got an unstoppable force(keep in mind he literally never trained in his life before the TOP). As long as I don't pick a fight with the MC and his group, or people above their power like Grand Priest and Zeno that is... not that I would... maybe a little... for sparring purposes though, no world ending shenanigans for me. I'm not THAT much of an Edge Lord.

Perfection cannot exist alongside Individuality. It's a problem most seen in systems at the National and International levels. Hence, why most countries tend to have flaws in their legal systems and they tend to act in the direction of Lesser Evils or Greater Goods... the biggest question that causes administrative officials the greatest stress involves this very philosophical concept: When does one who works towards the greater good draw the line? When does it become the lesser evil instead? When does the system they work for stop helping and start harming it's underlying principles? These questions only lead to more of the same, rather than providing answers. If perfection is impossible, then where do we draw the line? When said line is drawn, are there exceptions to it or must it be upheld regardless of circumstances? It's an unending philosophical debate with no real permanent answer. One simply must do the best they can to uphold their own morals while working both within the system and without... at the end of the day, the question we must ask ourselves is whether or not we can live with our decisions... I find focusing internally and projecting it externally works best for me. After all, I can't do much good for others if I, myself do not have the internal stability to act for them. A solid, internal foundation is necessary before providing external aid.

... they're in the US, right? we have this nifty little thing called The 2nd Amendment... a Constitutional right that allows us to Bear Arms against those who would harm us. Then there's also The Good Samaritan Act which essentially states that, in the absence of trained personnel, a civilian who is just trying to help or do the right thing is not guilty of any harm done due to a lack of training. a flimsy defence for killing someone, sure, but this is the joker we're talking about... I'm pretty sure any court would let him go with that excuse - *ahem* I mean defence - simply due to the positive public opinion that such an act would generate for him.

Joker's about to fuck around and find out!

I love that movie... probably one of the few movies I'd actually agree to watch on a date(still don't see why Madea isn't perfectly fine, but whatever; happy wife = happy life... mostly).

conflict is the act of one being clashing against another; be it physically, philosophically, or spiritually. the intent to harm is not a cause of conflict but a symptom of it escalating past reasonable levels.