you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -3 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (3 children)

“So we're just using hypotheticals” meanwhile your entire argument depends on civilisation definitely collapsing, doing so later definitely being worse, and doing so now leaving humanity able to rebuild.

I offered a possibility. You've built a whole prescription for humanity around your predictions.

And your bike analogy involves slowing down and steering to avoid a crash. You're advocating deliberately crashing because you've decided a worse accident is inevitable further down the road.

There's a lot wrapped up in that certainty, and its a sentiment that does personally annoy me for several reasons: You're assuming the problems you see won't be meaningfully understood or addressed by anyone else, and that because you can't see a workable solution, there isnt one. You're treating the limits of your own foresight as the limits of what's possible. Stop and consider whether you really consider yourself an unparalleled engineer and problem solver of the modern era. Dont tell me the answer, just ponder it.

Then, when it comes to your preferred scenario, suddenly humanity can cooperate, adapt and rebuild after civilisation collapses. Why does human ingenuity get to do so much heavy lifting after the catastrophe, but count for so little in preventing it? There's a huge juxtaposition in that reasoning.

You've scrutinised the future you dislike for everything that could go wrong, and waved through the future you prefer on everything that could go right. That's a very shaky basis for deciding everyone else would be better off enduring a collapse now.

And “if we shut down civilisation now, everything can come back” is doing an extraordinary amount of work there. How are you keeping people fed, water clean, medicines available and nuclear facilities maintained? Who's coordinating any of that through the collapse you're welcoming? Those are fairly significant details to skip on the way to “the earth can heal”.

You don't get to dismiss uncertainty in my argument while treating the most optimistic version of your own catastrophe scenario as a certainty, that's fucking nonsense.

I get that you're concerned but this is irrational and you probably need to talk to someone serious if this is actually weighing heavily on you. If its just an idle rant, less so.

AI isnt going to end, the big dog companies might go down, but you can run very good ones on your computer these days. Helps to look into stuff, the unknown is always scarier than the known.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 20 minutes ago (1 child)

    tl;dr

    AI is built from mass theft and anything built with it deserves to be stolen.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 10 minutes ago

    Companies having done that doesn't make it fundamental to the technology. That's just something a lot of people who base their worldview on article headlines parrot.

    Don't get me wrong, those practices are bad. But they come from the incentives and behaviour of the companies involved. The technology doesn't require them. That's a failure of a system that rewards companies for taking whatever they can get away with.

    All of this is a capitalism problem, focusing on the technology is a distraction that will never achieve anything.

  • source
  • parent