Can’t speak for them, but for myself the prospect of having both parents out of the house working while some sort of state sponsored babysitter raises our children is an incredibly shitty way to have a “family.”
Can’t speak for them, but for myself the prospect of having both parents out of the house working while some sort of state sponsored babysitter raises our children is an incredibly shitty way to have a “family.”
The biggest hurdle is that we don’t actually know what intelligence really is at all yet, computationally. Most of the history of science has been repeatedly learning “but things were actually more complicated than originally expected,” so making claims that we’re soon to be able to replicate something that we don’t actually properly understand yet may be a bit premature. The desire to replicate human intelligence by a machine has been around since at least the 1200’s brazen heads, and yet for everything we’ve discovered since we’re still just beating our heads against a wall trying to sleuth out what it really is that makes us ‘think.’
And we’re still waiting for a definite announcement that yes, humanity has finally produced room-temperature, ambient-pressure superconductors.
Exciting news for sure, but as usual it’s not quite there yet.
How exactly do you get “less” of a certain type of person without tearing them down?
I think the focus should be on not having so many white privileged people in the real world
Why should you focus on tearing others down, especially when you’re simply looking at them as a statistic rather than individuals?
Archive.is is useful for getting past them.
Well, it’s true there are people who would call me unreasonable.
First link seems fine. Here’s the second one.
If it can be done, people will do it. If you think the FBI are unique in this, you’re very naive. We need to fundamentally rethink how our technology is designed if we ever hope to have any privacy again.
I mean, we’re not there quite yet, but if future technological developments are used to own people instead of help them, then is it really a bad idea?
Or maybe people will eventually be fed up and we’ll start our own internet completely out of corporate control.
Or just return to the land, because it’s still right there. Would also help to do for climate change what corporations seem unwilling to do themselves.
The problem is what people are trying to do with the Internet. It was never going to be capable of replacing every facet of society the way these corporations seem to have envisioned things. To paraphrase Serial Experiments Lain: The wired should support the real world, not replace it.
Well they don’t care about problems until they affect their own families, so there’s that at least.
They super fucking salty that computers are not ushering in their utopian self-contained artificial society as they expected.
I’m all for this.
Again I’d say they’re not as openly unethical because they pretend they’re not preying on people.
So bad actors are certainly not kept at bay
My biggest problem is that it actually makes things easier for bad actors when you set them in stone, because there’s more things that they know they can count on to happen a certain way.
Frankly, with open access to the entire world, there are a very large number of completely real conspiracies which you are connected too, through intelligence agencies, mafias and terrorist organizations. Failure to recognize this fact is a big problem with the way the Internet has been designed.
Don’t talk about it! That’s how you summon them!