Yes, I was admittedly tired when I responded to this thread, and then seeing such long winded responses was quite annoying to me.
But I wasn’t trying to goad them, I was just exhausted at having to spend so much time and energy just to make my point, which seemed relatively non-controversial to me when I originally posted it.
Hmm, you seem like a relatively intelligent person, so perhaps you’re not accustomed to being corrected.
Your arguments contradict themselves and lack logical consistency. They are flimsy at best, and I lack the energy to explicitly demonstrate their triviality at the current moment. It seems that you start with the assumption that humanity is destined for a post scarcity utopia, and haphazardly arrange your arguments to help justify that conclusion.
Or perhaps it’s because you refuse to admit to yourself that your original comment was ill-considered, and thus you are forced to spout this nonsense in order to protect yourself from the emotional ramifications of admitting you may have misjudged the relative harm of nuclear weapons as compared to AI.
Regardless, it’s frustrating to watch you spin this web of sophistry instead of simply acknowledging that you were mistaken. I sincerely hope that you did not utilize AI to assist in writing that wall of text.
I would recommend that you reflect on my words when you’ve given yourself some time to calm down. It’s not so bad to be wrong sometimes, just think of it as an opportunity to learn and become smarter.
Nukes only “prevent” deaths by saying they’ll cause drastically large numbers of deaths otherwise. If the nukes didn’t exist, there wouldn’t then be the threat of death from the nukes, which is being prevented by more people having the nukes.
Okay? But war existed long before nuclear weapons, and it also causes a large number of deaths. If nukes didn’t exist, there would potentially be more wars, and thus more death.
Heck, if “AI” automated most of the work people did and put us out of a job, that would just accelerate our progress towards pushing for UBI/or an era of superabundance, which I’d welcome with open arms.
I wouldn’t be so sure about that. We have already automated essentially everything else, and yet people work more than ever. If goods can be produced automatically by machines for free, what’s to stop the owners of the machines from simply eliminating what used to be the working class?
But sure, seeing matrix multiplication causing statistically probable sentences to be formed really has me unable to stomach the potential consequences. /s
Your defensiveness speaks volumes.
And what did the printing press, automobile, and analog computer bring?
An ever more powerful nucleus of mechanization that has resulted in the most devastating wars and the most widespread suffering in all of human history. Genocides, chattel slavery, famine, biochemical and nuclear weapons; mass extinction and the imminent destruction of the very planet on which we live.
Make human work obsolete so we can do what we care about and hang out with people we like instead of spending our days doing labor to produce goods we rely on? Sign me up.
Sweet summer child. Making human work obsolete makes human beings obsolete. I envy your naivety.
But nuclear weapons have only been used twice in 80 years for military purposes. They have arguably prevented more deaths than they have caused.
And you’re drastically underselling the potential impact of AI. If anything, your reaction is a defense mechanism because you can’t bear to stomach the potential consequences of AI.
One could have easily reacted the same way to the invention of the printing press, or the automobile, or the analog computer. They all wasted a lot of energy for limited benefit, at first. But if the technology develops enough, it can destroy everything that we hold dear.
Human beings engineering their own obsolescence while cavalierly disregarding the potential consequences. A tale as old as time
Yes, I gathered that from the previous comment, but thank you for the additional info.
I just hope it doesn’t progress further in the future. AI is quite possibly a more catastrophic technological development than nuclear weapons.
Please let them not ruin Firefox with some bullshit AI. I can’t take much more of this, Firefox is one of the last things I have left.
I’m not familiar with the details of that, but it seems like more of a red herring to me. A form of controlled opposition to divert people away from truly revolutionary platforms.
Of course it has to seem like a plausible alternative, but is it actually decentralized or altruistic enough to make a meaningful difference? I think not.
I wish he had mentioned Lemmy, but it’s understandable that he didn’t. Also Bluesky isn’t an alternative to big tech, it IS big tech. I wish it wasn’t stealing so much of our publicity lately.
But beggars can’t be choosers, and we have seen some nice growth over the past couple months. John Oliver fans are the perfect candidates to join the fediverse, hopefully some of them find their way to Lemmy.
It’s unfortunate that the active c/datahoarder is on lemmy.ml, because it always derails the conversation into the tankie question. But it’s honestly on brand for there to be multiple c/datahoarder communities on Lemmy. You know, for backup and redundancy purposes 😏
Shout out to @cm0002@lemmy.world for getting some activity going on !datahoarder@lemmy.world.
Yes. America controls the world, and Europeans are salty about it. I didn’t even realize how salty until I started using Lemmy, but it’s incredibly obvious on here.
FWIW, I would be salty too. But you can also be mature about it and realize that the average American isn’t to blame for this reality.
I agree wholeheartedly. My assumption was that such behavior was simply a symptom of the relatively larger proportion of Europeans on this site, and their obvious jealousy and insecurity regarding Americans. I still believe that is the most likely explanation. To be clear, America has done hella dumb shit lately, and is deserving of criticism on many fronts. But what OP is referring to goes beyond that. It’s emotional animosity that overflows the bounds of reasonable criticism and targets individuals rather than governmental decisions or policies.
The number of times that I have seen people refer to the American contribution to WWII as cowardice, meaningless, etc, is too damn high. 400,000 Americans died in that war. Read a fucking history book you ignorant, insensitive fucks.
It’s certainly possible that there are agents in our midst sowing divisiveness, although unlikely. I don’t have any beef with any nationality, because I don’t judge people based on where they were born. That should be common sense, but it’s apparently difficult for some people to wrap their heads around.
This doesn’t work too well in practice though, as we saw on reddit. If a new user looks for a subreddit about knives, 9 times out of 10 they will find r/knives and if it’s decently active they’ll never learn about r/knife. The name squatters have a massive advantage over the alternatives based on that alone.
Granted, the instance based community system has a similar problem where the communities on the biggest instances will have an advantage in attracting new users. But it’s a lot easier to overturn because you don’t have to use a janky alternative name, and you can easily publicize poor moderation and dissent on other servers.
Without the alternative server component, holding control over certain community names is way too powerful, and over time results in a significant degradation of the usability of the site, as it becomes harder and harder to find the actual well-moderated communities. Using alternative names doesn’t solve the problem, it just provides a temporary workaround. Federation actually solves the problem in the long term.
There is definitely room for improvement on the modlog. But also moderators and admins can view the full removed comment and media, so it’s not like that’s impossible. It’s a hell of a lot better than nothing, that’s for sure.