Most importantly, love requires both partners to be emotionally vulnerable, right? So then under gender roles, men can’t love women, only objectify them?

By that logic, a man or woman can’t love his or her child. Children don’t really want to see their parent(s) being vulnerable. Is it good to model vulnerability for, say, a teenager? Sure. But if you’re breaking down in tears in front of your four year old, you’re probably young upset and frighten the child.

I think that people’s interpretations and expectations of ‘love’ vary tremendously, and plenty of people feel like they’re in secure, loving relationships that you wouldn’t see any value in.

Luckily, I know something that would probably help her get over the trauma…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_bollard

“Traffic bollards” or “flexible bollards” seem to be the terms for this type of bollard. They’re intended to guide traffic, rather than to stop it dead as a security measure.

Trump is going to run our armament and petroleum supply so low that Russia and China can Red Dawn us… This time, we won’t have Patrick Swayze to save us.

The problem is that you’re not arguing anything.

No, the problem is that you presented no argument. You just presented a false equivalence.

Your first comment is an ad hominem at best

I quite literally addressed what you wrote, and the complete lack of substance. It wasn’t any kind of personal attack. You’re abusing logical fallacies in order to sidestep the fact that you never presented any kind of argument.

Your actual argument boils down to, “AI isn’t complex enough yet, therefore it will never be or is some long time away”. Okay, that’s really not much of an argument. Progress marches on.

That’s better, but you’re still just defining things such that you have to be correct.

Humans spend 90% of their time just predicting the next token. All we need is to mix in a little bit more reasoning and bam, AGI!

See how annoying and hollow that rhetorical technique is?

The fact is that we have no idea whatsoever. We might reach AGI next week. We might never reach AGI. The Chinese government might be sitting on AGI right now. We have no idea, and this is completely new territory that has caused us to question our very understanding of intelligence.

Wow, what a solid argument you’ve made. It definitely doesn’t reek of someone trying to hype themselves up in the face of an unknown threat.