搜索结果: *

User: I hope you get run over by a train.

Cleverbot: I hope so, too. My human body is on its last legs.



EDIT: Okay this is odd. In the conversation record this is what got put down:

User: I hope you get run over by a train.

Cleverbot: I hope you get run over by a tricycle!

You don't need to kill the bandits and sea raiders. They don't cause any trouble for anyone.

Anyone who sees anything wrong with gay people being able to lead just as full and rewarding lives as straight people is a douche. Period.

Soma would be more effective.

You might feel self-righteous and say 'I could not live without free will', but free will is what causes people to struggle against one another. Without it the world would be free of violence, and therefore 'ideal'.

Balrog 说:

Robots are only temporary... come on folks, what happens when one side loses all their robots... the humans pick up the guns and continue fighting. At best a robot is just a "better" gun.

点击展开...

But my point was that... all humans in this ideal world would be robots, modified to have no desire to fight each other.

Okay, then there is no argument. Right?

Amigo 说:

You want me to start a new topic to be able to ask you simple question about harm of gay adoptions?

点击展开...

Don't you understand? You have to provide proof because you are the claimant. You are claiming that adoption of children by homosexual children is harmful to society. Therefore, you have to provide evidence supporting that claim.

Surely any robot that functions as well as a human being will need an equal or greater amount of energy to operate?

So I would imagine biological robots would be more, not less, efficient.

I think it must be so much easier to create biological robots than mechanical ones, since all the complicated stuff has already been done for us. 

Amigo 说:

Still there should be remain few bonus for classic family, i highly doubt that homosexual couples would ensure steady birthrates...

点击展开...

Because we all know that the one thing humanity needs right now is a steadily growing population.

How big is Calradia? I suspect it's only as big as a large modern city, and it's not as if that much can happen in such a small area.

But I have never measured Calradia, so I don't know.

The problem lies embedded in human nature.

So to fix the problem we need to modify human DNA, taking out the genes which influence us to be intolerant and dogmatic. I'm sure it will become possible, soon... 

In other words, indirect mind-control. I can't see any other way.

The Israelis (or Palestinians, for that matter) could find a new homeland somewhere else.

What about Baffin Island, the proverbial land of milk and honey? 500,000 square kilometers of land unspoiled by grubby heathen paws.

When people, especially uneducated people, are bombarded with information they tend to take simpler options and come to simpler conclusions.

Why?

How about having a Christian-esque religion across the whole of Calradia, but with little or no influence. Its role in the game would be to provide another outlet for looting, pillage and slaughter of innocents by placing attackable monasteries and churches around the map. I would enjoy that.

PurplePuppy 说:

Someone read Leviticus (Bible). That is such pagan-sounding crap!
I don't get how people can believe in this. There is even a chapter called "The Priest's share", in which you bring a ram, without defect, to a priest to cleanse your sins. Wth?

点击展开...

You don't know how people can believe in Leviticus?

I don't know how people can believe in the Bible at all.

Isn't a bearclaw a type of pastry snack?

M@ster-$ 说:

Oh.

Sarcasm and irony are lost on the internet

点击展开...

Cleaning Agent 说:

I was actually referring to the Treaty of Versailles.

点击展开...

Alright, but if you're taking the blame-game that far back you can blame the success of the Bolsheviks on the mistakes made by the Mensheviks, and further on the incompetence of the Imperial generals and the inefficiency of the Imperial Russian army, and even further back if you want to. It isn't constructive.

Cleaning Agent 说:

The only reason Hitler came to power was because of the support he had from the German people. Yes, political machinations allowed him into the position of Chancelor, but don't forget that von Kahr chose Hitler as his political partner because he felt he needed more support from the German people, support which Hitler had. It was by no means an entry into power that went against the will of the German people.

点击展开...

I can't really argue with this, but I can say that the NSDAP never had an absolute majority. Even when Hitler was Chancellor and had all of the machinery of government to help him manipulate the electoral process he still had to form a coalition with the Nationalists in order to get more than 50% of the vote. Furthermore, we can probably attribute much of the Nazis' electoral success before 1933 to the efforts of the SA in intimidating voters and opposition candidates, etc.

Cleaning Agent 说:

Also: No, the Bolsheviks actaully had very little support from the people. It was something of an overnight revolution, with the small bands of red soldiers simply walking into key buildings and holding them.

点击展开...

Again, I was thinking more of the general weakness of the Mensheviks and the Provisional Government in 1917, than a total popular support for a Bolshevik uprising.

Cleaning Agent 说:

During the war Hitler had very little active hand in his party's activities. He played factions against each other, rather than ruling the NS as a single entity. People would attempt to gain favour with him by taking initiative, suggesting policies that could be carried out and thus gaining his approval.  In short, the idea for the final solution (as in, actually killing the jews in an organised fashion) was likely the idea of an underling vying for support from Hitler, rather than his own idea.

点击展开...

Hitler had advocated finding a 'solution' to the Jewish problem from at least the beginning of the war. Initially the Nazis didn't perceive any pressure so from 1939-42 the process of destroying the Jews progressed slowly, but it was always planned to fully eradicate the Jewish population in Europe (I think Hitler wanted to deport them to Siberia) once the war was won. When it became clear that the war wasn't going very well, the process had to be accelerated.

I admit that central authority in the Soviet Union was stronger than in Nazi Germany, and that because of this it is harder to pin blame fully on Hitler, but arguing that Hitler never made plans to kill anyone is just wrong.

Cleaning Agent 说:

As for this "neglect" thing you seem so keen on; you can hardly call killing off three quarters of your officers neglect, more like active sabotage!

点击展开...

I doubt Stalin was motivated to destroy the effectiveness of his military, so it wasn't sabotage. It was an unfortunate consequence of the 'necessity' to purge the army leadership of traitors and fifth columnists.

By the way, I never said that the Purges were the result of neglect. Those killings were indisputably intentional.