Wait, people trusted a corporation and got screwed?!? Why, that's...unheard of!(My wife, bless her, has "purchased" dozens of movies on amazon. I warned her that when the amazon wind changes, she may regret those purchases. I got the look.)
<Many people are ego-driven. Their opinions aren’t positions they hold; they are the position. Prove the idea wrong and you haven’t corrected a fact, you’ve attacked a person. So they defend it the way anyone defends themselves: not with reason, but with resistance. The stronger your argument, the harder they dig in.>
Wouldn't it have been easier to say they are idiots? (I guess you needed to explain it, but like you said, it won't help.)
I think most posters are missing the point. They're over thinking the scene. Ai can never feel anything. Info isn't the same as knowledge, knowledge isn't the same as wisdom.
We humans are too complex to be answered by the infinite knowledge of Ai. IF we care about the possible harm it can be to humans, we can then properly deal with the use of Ai. It's a wonderful tool for some things, however, we tend to over do everything when it comes to tech. Humans matter, but can we trust corporations or governments to protect us from Ai?
I agree with your account, the problem is how many perceive slavery. Here in the south (USA) many still think the slaves before the Civil War were "happy". They obviously weren't slaves. Until ALL mankind looks slavery fully in the eye for understanding, we will continue to undervalue those other then ourselves.
Well said. For my part: seek beauty and happiness. Don't make others sad.
The last part is far more difficult. Why? As someone said, "We have caveman emotions, live under medieval systems and have access to god-like technology."
Perhaps a simpler example: when driving on the highway, stay out of other driver's way, enjoy the experience and don't cause danger. I can't control how others drive, but I can get out of the way.
Your reply is reasonable. I've always thought the biggest problem to almost anything is human. We sometimes make the most thoughtless decisions and justify them with the flimsiest of excuses. We marvel at the stubbornness of two year-olds, then ignore ourselves.
Really cool story! It's always been my premise that good maintenance means longevity on vehicles. I keep our vehicles with the idea of "driving the wheels off of them", but always end up giving them to my kids after wanting an upgrade vehicle with some modern tech. (One of them has almost 200K miles on it.)
As for a Honda Element, I've always wanted one, but my wife thinks they're ugly. ;)
Gee, what could go wrong using governmental info to provide personal gain? Surely they wouldn't be tempted to start causing situations to become reality for personal gain! (ala Dick Cheney and Halliburton.)
Politician are servants of the people, for the people. This involves sacrifice and following the law. (I realize this is a naive statement, but shouldn't we be jailing these law breakers?)
Some teachers, like many of us, have caveman emotions, live under near medieval systems and have access to god-like tech. (My version of a quote I read earlier this year.)
Absolutely, rotary phones sucked! Always in the way, slow as a sloth and a mis-dial was the worst. Having said all that, these "cell" phones look pretty cool.
You are to be commended for an apology, it shows class and decency.
As for the militarization of Silicon Valley, it's been said we have god-like tech, but not the emotional discipline for such responsibilities. Aside from the fact that we humans suck, we repeat our worst mistakes without, it seems, a second thought. Then, when we're called out, we let our ego warp to any excuse that will suffice. The Kissinger example mentioned above almost made me ill.
I like/love your statement. The problem is, to their detriment, most users don't have the chops to switch to Linux/Apple.(Or the patience.)
Since I couldn't afford Apple at the time, I jumped into Red Hat years age. What a nightmare! But I didn't give up because it was kind of fun. A lot of folks didn't think so. Linux and Apple have made tremendous strides, of course, but if tech stuff is not your thing, you keep financing MS.
On this great site, there's a lot of complicated things discussed, some of which I admit I don't grasp. Many outside this sphere are mostly lost on any tech that is slightly complex, sometimes even if they are helped. One could argue, correctly, that they learn their smartphones and smart TVs just fine. These devises are computer like, but still not a computer. Changing people's minds on operating systems is as hard as politics and religion I've found.
It does. I have a sizeable ball cap collection, all in labeled shoe boxes. I'll be changing them for plastic bins on my next Ikea Swedish meatball run.
I'm retired from working in the trades. My bosses only cared if I could do the job, period. Put up or shut up and go home. The only slight exception was when I went to work for an airline, for obvious reasons.
Although I once worked at a data center, I was on the facility side of things, but was always around the white shirt workers. All of us were happy to be gainfully employed and raising families, paying taxes, pursuing hobbies,etc.
I heard a radio article yesterday which said AI was very concerning for the future of data/tech workers, which was worrying to me. To paraphrase: it claimed that tens of thousands of tech workers are entering data in many different fields and in the process are doing what humans are doing as mentioned above. It claimed that the fear was that AI will replace these workers and instead of all those worker paying taxes/providing for families, perhaps ten or fifteen companies will be using AI to replace them and, as we all know, will pay a fraction of the taxes. (I don't mean to imply that paying taxes and employing people are equal, just that taxes are an important part of any economy.)
I don't have any expertise in business or economics, but it seems to me if AI isn't regulated somehow, not only will this threaten workers, it will further widen the gap between the haves and the have nots.