> If any of these classifiers work well on intelligence, orientation, character, capabilities, it might give scientific backing to some horrible practices like eugenics, abortions/extermination of undesirables etc.
I completely disagree -- I think the consequences of this technology could potentially alleviate much suffering, but it's important that we get ahead of it in terms of policy, so that the eugenicists can't capitalize on it.
As taboo as it is to say, I believe there are statistically significant differences in capacity and motivation between people.
If we continue to deny this (the current politically correct response), our wider social policy will assume an equality of capability that's just not true. This leads to policy solutions like re-education as a solution to homelessness or jobs lost to technological improvements, rather than accepting that some people can't hold down jobs that are valued in the 21st century and just giving them some damn housing and money to feed themselves.
Income inequality is a gigantic issue facing us in the next 20-50 years, and a sober understanding of the population distribution of talent is important as we face that. Most taxi and uber drivers displaced by self driving cars are not going be smart enough to take dev bootcamps and become software developers. It's critical that we accept this as a society so that we can get safety nets like universal income or government make-work programs in place, so that these folks can live decent lives.
> This is a truly horrifying scenario, an ultimate black pill and humanity will need to confront it soon it seems.
This was the most frustrating thing about James Damore's firing from Google, is that rather than debating the accuracy and policy consequences of Damore's point (equal intellectual capacity but differing levels of motivation for software engineering work between men and women) they stuck their head, called him a bigot, and fired him.
Technologies like this could be amazing for progressive politics, but these cherished notions of equality of capability need to die. I don't think the current zeitgeist of the left will let that happen.
I completely disagree -- I think the consequences of this technology could potentially alleviate much suffering, but it's important that we get ahead of it in terms of policy, so that the eugenicists can't capitalize on it.
As taboo as it is to say, I believe there are statistically significant differences in capacity and motivation between people.
If we continue to deny this (the current politically correct response), our wider social policy will assume an equality of capability that's just not true. This leads to policy solutions like re-education as a solution to homelessness or jobs lost to technological improvements, rather than accepting that some people can't hold down jobs that are valued in the 21st century and just giving them some damn housing and money to feed themselves.
Income inequality is a gigantic issue facing us in the next 20-50 years, and a sober understanding of the population distribution of talent is important as we face that. Most taxi and uber drivers displaced by self driving cars are not going be smart enough to take dev bootcamps and become software developers. It's critical that we accept this as a society so that we can get safety nets like universal income or government make-work programs in place, so that these folks can live decent lives.
> This is a truly horrifying scenario, an ultimate black pill and humanity will need to confront it soon it seems.
This was the most frustrating thing about James Damore's firing from Google, is that rather than debating the accuracy and policy consequences of Damore's point (equal intellectual capacity but differing levels of motivation for software engineering work between men and women) they stuck their head, called him a bigot, and fired him.
Technologies like this could be amazing for progressive politics, but these cherished notions of equality of capability need to die. I don't think the current zeitgeist of the left will let that happen.