jakelafort

Am in agreement again on all counts with Davis as to hate speech.

My impression in having read and heard over the years so many American intellectuals want to protect hate speech is that it is much harder when there is so much consensus to change the views of people who have mistakenly appreciated the first amendment in regards to speech. That…[Read more]

Unseen when ya consider how the onset of the covid pandemic rapidly devolved into a political nightmare and created so much polarization i scarcely doubt the power of AI to give and disseminate the information best calculated to cause unity and stimulate action. Humans are so very amenable to being led and never detecting the manipulation. In…[Read more]

Unseen: Who decides what the public gets to hear when it comes to, for example, hate speech? Should those who stand to benefit be required to recuse themselves?

As it stands the USA is the fuck you wild, wild west. The government fed, state and local has the power to pass laws defining and censoring hate speech. If a citizen is prosecuted for…[Read more]

Unseen, the dissemination of information is a great big issue.

It is not a first amendment issue for citizen’s 1st amend. rights but it is huge. As i indicated i would love to see some social engineering that is addressing climate change.

Unseen, i think you are conflating issues.

Yes governments and the propaganda they produce is dependent on who is in power. Ultimately in theory when the propaganda is not to the liking of the citizenry they can change the government to their liking. Governments can pass laws that are unconstitutional. In theory the Supreme Court is the arbiter…[Read more]

Sayeth Unseen: Hate speech is nothing new, Jake. Nor has it gotten worse over the years.

As to the former same applies to slavery. Duration of a practice is not an argument as to its validity. As to the latter i think that is probably false. Admittedly hate speech just prior and during Nazi Germany was worse. Even in the USA there was Father…[Read more]

Following up on Davis i can report that slippery slope is a sloppy stop gap substitute for an actual argument. Law is filled with tough issues and close factual distinctions requiring a judge to make that call..

I think some of the failure to modify stance on hate speech as it relates to the first amendment is explained by our early adoption of…[Read more]

Enco, I meant to say that i did not think that was sufficient to be characterized as hate speech.

Lets not forget you said no speech rights for those who pretend to be victims of hate crimes. You want those bastards prosecuted to the full extent of the law. (i agree btw if that ever actually happens) Juxtapose that against your intended…[Read more]

Enco, you will never concede anything in defense of your ideology. Neither will a fundamentalist..

So your experience with hate speech is dispositive of the issue?

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…[Read more]

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…

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

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…[Read more]

Unseen if it is just an inquiry as opposed to unfounded and paranoid thinking it is not a conspiracy.

Autumn i like your perspective.

It’s all for nothing if we can’t address ourselves and the breakdowns in how we process and communicate information. What I see is a lot of propagandistic content, or content curated because it elicits a quick emotional response. It’s a product like refined sugar and we can’t stop eating it even as it makes u…[Read more]

Unseen, i was not contemplating drones or addressing anything beyond speech. Also this general idea only occurred to me this morning so it may have more chincs than a primitive shelter on naked and afraid. And no doubt introducing the notion of AI in connection with speech would be met with many criticisms including the slippery Orwellian hill.

Autumn i assume you are thinking of the pandemic.

My guess is that left leaning people would embrace empiricism. On the other hand i think the idea is too radical to gain acceptance except in a tiny minority. For the most part those of us who value rationalism and strive to be reasonable would find a good way to critique the reliability of…[Read more]

Here is an idea.

It is time to introduce AI into the arena of free speech. In terms of hate speech allow the algorithms to determine the probable impact of hate speech. We program the AI to determine what level of probable harm is acceptable and what level is unacceptable. The AI acts as an arbiter of prior restraint utilizing its intelligence…[Read more]