(Title Censored)

Homepage Forums Politics (Title Censored)

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 157 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #42510
    jakelafort
    Participant

    The roll of AI in our future albeit a twinkle of a future is an interesting topic.

    What if we could utilize AI to create a world-wide cooperative endeavor to address climate change. Lets suppose it is the governments who are working together to approve a climate change campaign that is specifically targeting our super impressionable brains to effectuate an indoctrination that makes the great majority of us the equivalent of religious fundamentalists? Instead of the indoctrination being religious lies and horrific morals it would be a cause that is for the benefit of humanity and carries the possibility that global cooperation might lead to a diminished sense of us and them and lead to further cooperation. My assumption is that AI could produce algorithms based on our profile that make us vulnerable to the messaging and the dynamics of group-think and feelings associated with being a part of something bigger than ourselves.

    #42511
    jakelafort
    Participant

    Enco, you skirted the issue. Davis summed it up nicely. Do you have a substantive response?

    #42518
    jakelafort
    Participant

    Scrap the notion of governments being the originators of AI that is utilized to bend humanity towards cooperation in addressing climate change. Governments are for sale and too many monied interests would be adversely affected by the necessary changes. Idk maybe billionaires get together to infect the collective consciousness in a positive way…

    #42519

    @Unseen – I have a friend who is a serious photographer and a nerd when it comes to cameras. He has a similar Panasonic camera for wildlife when he goes on Safari and also a Canon EOS R5 for nude models. I could be mixed up on that as I have no knowledge of cameras myself but he never ceases to explain the technical benefits of each to me! I think he has about 40K worth of equipment.  I just organize the best pc\graphics card for Photoshop and other software for him.

    #42520

    @SimonI think philosophy is good at supplying questions that need answering.

    A classic question for philosophy students is to ask them “OK, should we all go outside now and kill ourselves and if not, why not”. I think that question demands an answer.

    #42521

    @_Robert_ – I have no reason to believe that I shall be received there, not even on a Sunday. I will happily settle for whatever the Everglades has to offer like Flamingos flying endlessly to the silent sky…….

     

     

    #42523
    Davis
    Participant

    A classic question for philosophy students is to ask them “OK, should we all go outside now and kill ourselves and if not, why not”. I think that question demands an answer.

    It is actually very interesting how moral systems deal with suicide/euthanasia. I heavily question the Judaeo-Christian baggage left over even in our secular societies that make euthanasia/assisted-suicide totally taboo (even the conservative government wouldn’t pass an extremely weak version of assisted-suicide law despite 75% of Brits being all for it). “Because life is precious” is not a satisfactory answer, nor is “because you have so much to live for”. Even “because people are counting on you” does not necessarily trump individual autonomy. No one, has, in fact ever given me a robust moral argument against someone ending their life (with say at least a couple months to think about it and no mental health issues) … unless it is a “received morality” like because God said so”.

    #42524
    Unseen
    Participant

    I’m paraphrasing savagely here, but Sartre offered that man is inescapably doomed to be free (one of his major themes, BTW) because he can always commit suicide. Imprison me? Okay, I’ll tie my blanket around a window bar and around my neck and hang myself. I win Jeffrey Epstein-style.

     

    #42525
    Simon Paynton
    Participant

    A classic question for philosophy students is to ask them “OK, should we all go outside now and kill ourselves and if not, why not”. I think that question demands an answer.

    That’s a fair enough question.  I think Christians want to ask atheists why they don’t kill themselves, since their lives are “empty and meaningless” without God and eternal life.

    It’s a grim and sad thing to contemplate, but I believe everyone has the right to commit suicide if circumstances demand it.  To deny them the right is to deny them their dignity.  Temporary depression isn’t a good enough reason though.

    #42526
    PopeBeanie
    Moderator

    About the use of AI in various decision making, I think it’s increasingly both useful, and risky. Ultimately, how AI is programmed and given credence will always depend on who owns and runs the AI… at least until AI is allowed — intentionally or accidentally — to take over completely, with no one able to control it or warn others about it.

    Meanwhile, until an apocalyptic loss of control, it will be one person or groups of people, or corporations or governments who will use or misuse AI. Hopefully we’ll all be able to see and track the multiple ways in which AI will evolve.

    Personally, I trust our military to employ it wisely, largely because the alternative of using AI is to just keep dropping dumb bombs that kill more widely and indiscriminately. Avoiding the calculation of high value target vs accidental collateral damage is not reasonable, whether dropping bombs the traditional way, or using AI to increase precision. It does seem reasonable as Jake’s suggesting to have the remote controller be human who’s able to make final decisions, but if AI can help the operator make better decisions, then that’s the way usage of AI should evolve.

    China’s already using AI for it’s own purposes, to enforce behavioral control over its citizens. I would be watching them and learning how AI can evolve toward enabling such governmental abuses, in addition to watching other countries, and use by rulers like Putin. Eventually, I think AI will be as powerful a tool as nuclear energy and weaponry, for both better and worse.

    #42527
    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    Jake and Davis,

    Yet another problem with changing Copyright laws:

    The self-publishing technology of today makes publishing “The Great American Novel” or highly useful and detailed non-fiction within the reach of every person. Some Internet self-publishing businesses even offer additional assistance with editing, proofreading, and consultation. Public domain photos and artwork are even available to assist the self-publisher.

    Services such as iTunes, Soundcloud, and others enable the local garage band to take their sound and spread it globally, and even make a little profit for their efforts with commerce portals.

    Devices such as Singer programmable sewing machines, Cricut, Badge-A-Minit, and 3-D Printing technology enable the creative person to create Copyrightable designs to emboss, embroider, and shape onto almost any object that will take an imprint,

    Commerce portals and Web stores from Amazon, Barnes & Noble,and Etsy enable creative people to sell their creations to the public all over the world.

    If somebody starts screwing with Copyright laws, even though Academia and hard-copy and electronic media (sometimes called “Legacy Media”) have already got their benefit from Copyright law, that could jeopardize the budding and growing industry of self-publishing and the work of self-published creators.

    For a Progressive professing concern for the marginalized and downtrodden, messing with Copyright law could turn out to be yet another well-intentioned way of hurting the people you claim to support. ‘Snot good.

    • This reply was modified 4 years ago by TheEncogitationer. Reason: Embroidering an 'r' onto 'embroide' to make 'embroider.'
    #42532
    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    Unseen,

    You forgot to add that the 6 media companies tied in with the 3 investment firms “only know 3 chords” and “CBS and Warner Brothers RCA and All The Others” made sure that “Life Is A Rock” and “gotta turn it up louder, so my DJ told me.” 😁

    Some perspective here: When I was born, there were only three major Broadcast TV networks CBS, NBC, and ABC, one or two independent stations, and a couple of Welfare TV stations (my word for Corporation for Public Broadcasting,) all accessible only by tin foil and rabbit ears and careful positioning.

    And all of them signed on at 6 AM with a “test pattern” that included a Red Indian caricture so you could adjust the Red-Green balance (if you had color TV) and they played The National Anthem “The Star-Spangled Banner.”

    Then at the end of the day, they signed off at Midnight or when Johnny Carson went off at 1 AM for NBC, again with “The Star-Spangled Banner.” TV was not 24/7/365 back in those days, many towns were unofficially “sunset towns” and “nothing good happened after Midnight.”

    Radio was only on the AM frequency or on Shortwave if you had one of the fancier models and FM wasn’t a thing until later. The musical selection was only “Your Hit Parade” or “Billboard Top 20 or 40” and in tightly segregated genres of music, or even just regional music.

    Some people had scanners for Police,,Fire, Emergency, and Aircraft frequencies, but those required installing crystals designed to pick up the specific frequency.

    Some people communicated worldwide with Ham Radio and still do for emergencies, but it requires an FCC license and in the old days required use of Morse Code and no message could be commercial or racy or vulgar.

    Some people communicated with Citizen’s Band Radio, wbicb required a license and forbade commercials or obscene language or illegal uses like solicitation for prostitution. (Parenthetically, not that there’s anything wrong with it, but back then, you could never say “Good Buddy” on the CB unless the person you’re addressing on the CB reciprocated, if at all–it had homosexual intimations–and you would NEVER give out your “Home 10-20!”)

    And in between time, television was what FCC Commissioner Newton Minow called “a vast wasteland.” (Never mind that this “vast wasteland” was the result of the FCC having the final say over who could have the license to broadcast, all “in the public interest,” of course.)

    Later on, there came pay cable TV, which all the Left-Wing moral panickers said would mean the end of free broadcast TV and which all the Right-Wing moral panickers said would lead to further “moral degradation,” which was bad enough pre-Hayes Code for movies and pre-Comics Code for comics. Despite these Crusaders, Cable TV spread and increased the number of channels to 20 or 30 and like USA Network’s Rhonda Shere, you could stay UP All Night!

    Then came Satellite TV, which brought hundreds of channels, but which required special dishes, which originally took up a big chuck of the yard and required a credit check for subscription.

    Now, with the Internet sending video wnd audio files of bits and bytes, and streamed wirelessly, there are literaĺy millions of stations with content of the entire ever-growing extent of human knowledge, every political, social or philosophical and religious and irreligious worldview, and in every genre of entertainment in every human language and even in fictìonal languages like Middle Earth and Klingon!

    My Uncle who’s a scanner and Ham enthusiast has more streaming services than I do on his TV and showed me channels that are 24/7/365 of nothing but a geyser at Yellowstone, an octopus in an aquarium, or dash cam videos of car wrecks!

    And you still say there’s no choice out there? Is that what your problem is, Bunkie?

    • This reply was modified 4 years ago by TheEncogitationer. Reason: Spelling, so that I may communicate better
    • This reply was modified 4 years ago by TheEncogitationer. Reason: Addendums of stations
    • This reply was modified 4 years ago by TheEncogitationer. Reason: More spelling
    #42534
    jakelafort
    Participant

    Enco, i need a better metaphor than strawman to capture your dodge. Or do you simply misunderstand Davis. Take another gander at his words.

    Absolute free speech is a total fantasy. It is impossible and virtually nobody would support it when you realise how many laws that actually curb free speech exist which are utterly uncontroversial. If you are against libel, copyright infringement, causing a panic or speech that incites a crime but are against laws which curb the most vile of hate speech which unambiguously interferes with some groups: equality, safety, opportunity and dignity…then you aren’t a free speech crusader as you claim…you are simply selective of free speech in which protecting someone’s reputation or intellectual property is essential but the basic quality of life of the most marginalised and vulnerable is “meh”.

    In other words the absence of nuance in advocating absolute free speech is borne of either ignorance or an absence of concern for the people who are members of groups who are historically victimized for being in those groups. I am not opposed to copyright law. I studied intellectual property in law school (remember next to nothing) and had no qualms or issues with the nature of the law and the interests it is protecting. On the other hand for the longest time i’ve thought how bankrupt putative intellectuals are who are parroting free speech rhetoric as an absolute right when it is already a limited right.

    A nations laws indicate something of the values it holds and the embrace of the fuck you wild west at the expense of protecting the most vulnerable citizens stinks to high fake heaven. You’ve shown again and again you support the fuck you wild west.

    #42537
    Davis
    Participant

    Enco, I have no problem with curtailing free speech for reasonable reasons (which by the way you also have no problem with). What we agree on are things like: libel, some degree of copyright, incitement of crime, causing a panic etc.

    Where you seem to draw the line is with even the most virulent vicious bigoted hate speech which has been undeniably linked to less equality, opportunities and higher discrimination and suicide levels, worse mental health and knock on effects which affect economy and public safety. Perhaps the right to say the most extreme pointless toxic bigoted shit is more important for some people than protecting the most vulnerable people in society and ensuring we maintain some of their other rights. This only goes to show we don’t remotely live in a post-bigoted society…because the right to simply live your life in equality, dignity and even safety isn’t as important as things like copyright and libel laws.

    #42539
    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    Jake and Davis,

    Look I am no stranger to hate speech. I’ve been called “Queer” and a “Faggot” since 5th Grade when I barely had an idea of what sexuality even was.

    On another Forum, I just recently got called words to the effect of being a “Davos Man, George Soros-Loving, Great Reset, One-Worlder Faggot” by some Putin apologist just because I oppose Putin and his War in Ukraine.

    My response? I point up Putin’s latest fuck-ups like letting a cruiser get sunk with nuclear weapons and I mockingly say: “Maybe Zelenskyy will offer to send SCUBA diving engineers to dislodge the weapons, you know, for keeps!” Or, I’ll say: “Putin could end this anytime he wants with a Macarov in his pocket pointed in his mouth, just like the other Wickedly Great One!”

    Then I punctuate the post with “Fuck Off, Revanchist!”

    And there’s another troll on this same Forum who’s not only a Putineer, but a Holocaust Denier and–no joke–he also thinks that lying should be outlawed. Wrap your head around that one. (Presumably, he thinks people who say that the Holocaust happened are liars who should be imprisoned. Be careful what you wish for, folks.)

    I respond to him with all manner of sarcasm showing the ridiculousness of his positions. I’ll say: “So millions of people who don’t believe in tattoooing, who think it’s desecration of the body, took tattoos on themselves as part of some international fraternity prank?”

    I also mocked his position on lying by spinning a yarn about Larry The Cable Guy and Jerry Seinfeld in a death camp:

    “Well you see, Jerry, I got this Camouflage Square patch with a fish on it because I was at the Bait and Tackle Shop with my Blue Collar Comedy Buddies, and I told them: ‘I caught a fish THIS BIG!’ Then a bunch o’ Jackboots arrested us, put us on a damned ol’ train, and took us here! When Ron White called himslf ‘Tater Salad’ to the Kommandant, we never heard from him again!”

    However I respond, I always punctuate my post with: “Fuck Off, Nazi!”

    Lately, he says this is “a lame attempt at coercion.” I said: “I didn’t know snowflakes came shaped like Sunwheels, Celtic Crosses, and Swastikas!” and told him “Fuck Off, Nazi!” again!

    As much as I’ve condemned The Catholic Church, The Southen Baptist Convention, The Latter Day Saints, and other child abusers, no one has dared to call me a “Groomer,” but I’ll be ready for them if it happens.

    Don’t knock the “fuck you Wild West” until you’ve tried it, Jake. It’s fun, it’s an exercise in resilience, and it beats curling in a fetal position!

    • This reply was modified 4 years ago by TheEncogitationer. Reason: Adding a comma to offend Lowered Expectationists
    • This reply was modified 4 years ago by TheEncogitationer.
Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 157 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.