It’s not about whether the person knows or not. It’s more about that the person can’t believe this is happening even if it follows all the norms that we’re all supposed to know about, apparently.
In other words, just because such a system could be used in this way, is it good that it is being used this way? That’s the energy this is coming from.
But I agree with your premise, even in its snark, none of us are stupid - we should already know.
Because they are long-running discussions, it’s not repetitive. When we allow Rust or JS threads to keep popping up, it’s because we evolve with the topic over time and continuously discuss it.
What the HN shadow mod team is doing is killing the possibility of a long-running, evolving discourse on important topics.
The thing is they want to make the point DEI went too far. If they are finally getting to the “we ourselves have gone too far”, then they may put in a black woman to show some type of capitulation without giving up moral superiority.
That’s IF they are evolving, otherwise expect two white males.
A face to face meeting in a bunker. But seriously, we pondered the psychological damage of those who are drone operators. How is this different? There should be more ceremony when making decisions like this, not an afternoon group chat. Dress for it, look yourself in the face for it. Be present.
I’ll just say one thing about this administration. It is often true that when one thing is wrong with a man, then it’s possible all things are wrong with the man. We keep adding to the list, but I’m suggesting the inductive proof here. All things may be wrong with these men, which is scary.
Semantics. By knowing what meat to reveal amongst a group of tigers, you can effectively moderate the feeding frenzy. Some meat you keep hidden, lest they go nuts on each other for it.
If you want to put a tinfoil hat on, one could argue external state actors could have convinced the Trump admin their provided forms of communication are tapped, so they should consider alternatives. Such a state actor would know the alternatives are compromised well in advance by them.
The DoD or Pentagon don’t have their own messaging apps? Maybe our government doesn’t spend enough on tech. To me this is the same as if this were happening on Zoom or Discord, since these are not exactly world war level apps.
Finally, the echoes of Dr Strangelove are strong with this one. A veritable board room of talking heads that don’t ever really talk about life or death, but just the material numbers of raw commerce or messaging (deterrence) .
2. The affective-emotional component: how much does the pain hurt, and how does it affect emotional state?
I am going to add the spiritual aspect to this. I read a post on Reddit asking if Jesus truly suffered more than anyone else on earth, given that more people suffer for longer than his 24 hours ish on the cross.
Without believing the story of Christ at all, I was still able to do the mental exercise to see that the nature of the pain had nothing to do with the duration. For example, watching your mother watch you get crucified is heart stopping (or to watch another mother have to go through that).
So, what is the purpose of a human feeling that pain as an experiencer or as an observer? Why would our body elicit that psychic pain, why wouldn’t we just focus on the physical and ignore these other things? In that moment, your only concern should be the physical, but it’s not just physical.
The psychic pain almost has no use in a state of physical torture other than to inform the conscious of its duty to morality. Unfortunately, I do not believe science can ever conclude this is the answer (in no possible way, I’m open to being wrong).
I’m not asking you if you read carefully. This is not to be mean, I asked the GP specifically because they demonstrated that they understand the spirit of what I am talking about. Your own confusion is stemming from something else, not my question (you don’t even recognize my question, as evidenced).
For example, who raised you? See, that’s a question you might not understand but it’s the spirit of my original question.
I suppose at the end, when you have a discussion with God about why you did the things you did and try to explain yourself, a few rounds of conversation will have had you surrender your prior beliefs.
In a sense, there’s no argument against the LLM, or God. Take that how you want.
That’s the thing about the GP. In a sense, this poster is actually hallucinating. We are having to “correct” their hallucination that they use an LLM deeply.
Well, are we willing to do serious moral training? For example, if you make Elon Musk live with a family that relies on Medicaid, would that be sufficient to convey the experience to such a person? Moral training requires exposure and being uncomfortable. You have to inspire someone to feel the other side, and I agree, just telling them doesn’t appear to work.
Do you think leaders should have moral training? And if so, how would such training be provided? Ytcombinator itself maybe deficient in providing moral guidance, but this just one anecdote. What does it say about our mentors and community leaders when they stay out of the moral and simply stay in the technical and business?
Mark Zuckerberg had to turn around and beg forgiveness from the parents of social media users in Congress. This needed to be broadcast globally, and witnessed, because that event shows the full power of the entire history of what this all was, that by the end of it we had to beg forgiveness. I do believe we’ve crossed a threshold and these topics are now in the forefront. The moral question.
In other words, just because such a system could be used in this way, is it good that it is being used this way? That’s the energy this is coming from.
But I agree with your premise, even in its snark, none of us are stupid - we should already know.