@billbarnwell I know OL versatility is valuable, but tend to think the Packers made a mistake valuing that over talent/skill in recent drafts. Having C playing G and G playing T is a great way to get overpowered by a good DL
@Jason@jonfavs You're likening the AI race to the industrial revolution when it's more like the Manhattan project. If you want us to thank you, invest in making sure it doesn't kill us all. And excuse us if we aren't willing to risk our lives because you're too blinded by ROI to see the risks.
@DrewDavenportFF Agreed. CMC's fantasy value is primarily in receiving and goal line work. Black isn't taking that away. I'll give up ~75 low value carries if it means CMC stays on the field all year.
@dwainmcfarland@Xfinity The target projections seem really low for CMC relative to historical per game averages. Don't you think that's an overcorrection to one game of data, especially given the circumstances (limited preseason work, cramps, Australia) and the fact that he still had 8 targets?
Tragically, when I first saw the movie “Don’t Look Up” in 2021, it struck a chord with me. I felt viscerally that humans would find ourselves in a comparable place one day - and soon.
If you haven’t seen the movie, I’d recommend it. A quick recap: Humans were explicitly warned that a comet that could destroy Earth was heading rapidly toward us. And instead of doing anything to stop it, the president, elected leaders and billionaire CEOs just spewed some bullshit about all the “jobs the comet would create.” The media treated the comet as casual entertainment. The public was split and the entire thing gets politicized. The movie ends with nearly all of human life wiped out.
Just about a year ago I had the opportunity to join a bipartisan freshman class breakfast with Sam Altman. I was shocked when he said to us, “in 18 months, I’ll trust artificial superintelligence to run my company better than I can.” I regret I didn’t engage more on this issue immediately.
Now here we are - it’s 2026 and engineers at the world’s leading AI companies are telling us that there is a >10% chance that artificial intelligence could kill all humans. They’re not mincing their words in the slightest. Not because of present day AI capabilities, but because it is evolving so exponentially that we could be in a doomsday scenario in a year. One year.
This is fucking serious. We need to halt new advanced AI development. We need guardrails, transparency and emergency powers. We need more employees at these companies to speak out publicly, loudly and fearlessly until everyone is forced to listen. We need the media to be covering this 24/7 until elected officials are forced to act. We need the Trump Administration to treat this with the urgency it deserves. We need the ability to shut an AI model off if there’s a credible threat to human life. The list goes on - and we don’t even know what the full list entails because this is all happening so fast. That’s why we need urgent, bipartisan public hearings and committees dedicated to developing and enacting solutions expeditiously.
This isn’t partisan. Let’s stop with the bullshit and come together for the sake of our shared humanity. I’m a 34-year-old Democratic Congresswoman, and I’d like to live to see my late 30s. I know my Republican colleagues want the same for themselves and their loved ones.
None of us can afford to be complacent about this any longer.
@billbarnwell I once flew into Sydney, landed at 8 am, explored the city all day, and tried to watch a movie at 8 pm at the outdoor cinema on the Harbour. Suffices to say I still don't know the plot of The Favourite. Got a great nap in front of ~200 people though.
@dgaspard@jonfavs@ESYudkowsky literally wrote a book of examples of how (and why) AI will end civilization. It's called If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies. Maybe put in a little effort before assuming this thing no one fully understands isn't dangerous.
@peterpattakos What do you think we can expect on the field? All the talk has been about the other stuff, I haven't seen anyone really do a deep dive on what he might do with this supporting cast
@dwainmcfarland To test how good we think Kyler will be - in dynasty, 12 team super flex, do you think a win now team should give up Bryce Young and a future 1st for Kyler?
@CleGuardPro Where is Kody Huff? He's still the reason I'm surprised by the Patrick Bailey trade, as a long term duo of Ingle and Huff always made sense to me
@RyanJ_Heath@FantasyPtsData Not sure what to make of this. Suggests teams perform better when ... doing something they do a lot. Which could just as easily be because they practice it more often, have talent better suited to it, or both, compared to under center drop backs being inherently more efficient
@TFG_Football@cannab1senjoyer Too many people think a floor works without a cap. 1 - a cap is the incentive for big market teams to pool local revenue, which is the only way an increased floor works. 2 - without a cap, big market teams will still grossly outspend small ones, even with a floor.
@travissram@TJStats More broadly, my point is these proposals don't work without a cap. Raising minimum salaries doesn't do anything but cost small market teams money. Reducing years of team control doesn't do anything except cost small market teams money and get good players to big teams sooner.
@travissram@TJStats I don't. I was reacting to @tjstats suggestion that teams should spend more without a floor, pointing out a logical reason why they don't - the absence of a cap means there's no incentive to do so. I would assume though that a floor/cap requires more revenue sharing to work.
@travissram@TJStats I don't care because of parity. I don't want to lose my baseball team. If you implement a floor/force Cleveland to spend more without doing something to make that economical (a cap and/or further revenue sharing), they're going to leave for a bigger market.