I'm thinking about getting my dad a plaque saying, "I consider the hours I spend with a cue in my hand are golden" that he can put over his pool table

Hee. That's awesome.

I had a philosoph professor in college who liked to wind up statements with "And then you got trouble!"

There were a couple of us who had a hard time not responding with "Right here in River City!"

I thought we were debating "what is AI" rather than "Have we created a robot that passes the Turing Test". The TT is still my benchmark for genuine intelligence. Then again, I've met people who flunk it...

My cousin has a PhD in computer science from Oxford and worked/s on AI in terms of making computer eyes able to track an object as it moves against a background. Apparently it's really really hard, and now Microsoft pays him lots of money to develop alternatives to Google.

If the research on a topic began in AI labs, then yes, I consider it AI even after it's widely available. See here for a list of current successes:

I think that's a weak stance. There's no reason one branch of research can't have offshoots or uses in other branches. And the whole wide use is or is not AI is a straw man of your own invention.

What does Emmett think W. is? Cause I'm assuming at 9 that he doesn't use mom's moniker "That Fucker"?

I've got my coworker using El Commandante Fuckwit (TM Deb G)

The Music Man is my dad's fave. One year my brother got the Harold Hill part in his jr. high play and it was Dueling Harold Hills around our household.

I've got my coworker using El Commandante Fuckwit (TM Deb G)

I'm still partial to George W. Backfeifengesicht myself. It's a mouthful, but it really does sum up what I feel about him.

What does Emmett think W. is? Cause I'm assuming at 9 that he doesn't use mom's moniker "That Fucker"?

He might, but not in front of me. It's undefined. Bush is merely the repository of all his 9 y.o. scorn, and a surprising number of violent fantasies.

"But it'd be okay if I hit George W. Bush in the face right?"
"Definitely not. Not least because the Secret Service would have you tied into a pretzel and kissing pavement in a nanosec."

But a University of Michigan study shows that the percentage of married women with advanced degrees has grown, not shrunk, over time.

OK, I'm guessing the number of people with advanced degrees has grown over time. Given that, wouldn't the real question be the percentage of women with advanced degrees who are married?

Or the percentage of married women who have advanced degrees? The original statement is totally ambiguous.

I'm okay with voice recognition in general, but the ones that add in verbal litter piss me off.

"Verbal litter"! What a great phrase. I shall use it every chance I get.