HN user
What's the difference between glasses and an iron lung? Only the degree, severity, dependance, impact, consequence, social implication, dehumanization, and every other meaningful aspect!
There is nothing new under the sun. You fail to address my clear moral objection with these irrelevant historical instances. It has no rhetorical value in this context.
Gameification of war is the literal worst thing I ever heard. Lords of War, eat your heart out.
I see you're being blammed. "They hated him because he spoke the truth." Just because this online character is from your alma mater website doesn't mean he's not cynically and shamelessly self-promoting.
This demonstrates the problem with an education that has no emphasis on the liberal arts, such as critical thinking. No justification is needed for why and how these names are easy to understand.
You're gesturing at some fundamental limit that, if it exists, there is no evidence of peaking yet. It is not rigorous to say AI has not contributed to architecture improvement.
Then this is a "Death of the gaps" which implies algorithm, eg Conway's, may solve AI non-life. So, not a fundamental denial but an architectual one.
If we are still following Schroedinger, this imbues humanity with the ability to train non-life into life, not that thing being not alive. Not that I do or am, just going by GP's criteria.
Does the press being an ad constitute the same thing as the information being false? If I advertize that my gun is dangerous, does the medium impact the truth value?
Agreed, and their zeroeth order prerogative isn't much better: to ensure the continued need and demand for the thrall of centralized authority that allows them to achieve their disparate goals. This ensures strong AI is never going to be able to empower autonomy that removes, causes questioning, or even causes awareness of their zeroeth order.
You are correct: there is a right and wrong. Rights are actions which do not initiate harm in the form of murder, assault, rape, theft, trespass, coercion, or deception. Wrong actions are the initiation of harm. What is truly lost is the ability to assess on first principles. You are afraid of an outcome, and think "good government" is going to protect you from that risk. A better master who will gaurd you instead of whip you is your end point. It is actually reflective of your character.
Exactly. It is clear as crystal that Epstein was (is) a Mossad honeypot.
Wait, why suggest it will "make a mess" of something when the prior in this case was a succesful debug? It doesn't feel very fair to say.
Consciousness is the causal factor, not government. You are putting the cart before the horse to insist on any political solution.
That simile breaks down because - unlike the state of the economy - the collective human capacity to understand, design, and produce these systems essentially only goes one way, barring the apocolyptic.
How so? If a person were confined to text only (a la Hawkins), does that qualify us to dismiss their subjectivity on the basis of the medium? Also, why can training not be at least analogized to the attunement to the popular intersubjective perception?
Where you are wrong is about controlling values. Axioms, incentives, and rhetorical framing are not "organic" in that they happen without a controlling force. See Prussian education, Rockefeller medicine, and your good ol' idiot box.
Yes, the social darwinist approach inevitably lead to eugenical thinking and the human meat grinder that follows. We, as being with the capacity to understand harmful v. non-harmful behaviour, have a consequence to harmful behaviour, collectively: human suffering and the suppression of freedom.
The violence of the state makes the market not "free." Unless you want to abstract all the way out: the planet is and always has been run through violent coercion by psycopaths, and, as exampled by reality, they are "free" to do so.
But in the sense they mean, the violence of the state precludes a free market. For the record, I do not believe in the validity of money, coercion, usury, violence.