> Common mental illnesses - particularly depression and anxiety - have incredibly high placebo response rates.
In my experience, both long term, major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder only substantially improve through understanding, which of course is realized in at least 2 ways: experience and/or therapy.
We can say with some certainty that antidepressants' effectiveness is questionable, at best, long term, but of particular interest for effective indication would be any number of psychoactive substances, which routinely make headlines for this type of treatment but remain taboo for some still yet to be resolved reasons.
Of course this ultimately boils down to personal choices, but attitudes towards drugs will change before we see any real progress in this area, I'm afraid.
> ...deepfake evidence being used to frame someone for a crime, etc? Is there a reason I shouldn't be concerned about these prospects?
This is already happening, I'm reasonably certain, and until something of substance is done about it on a systemic, legal level, "deepfake" proliferation will lead to further systemic 'othering' of already-marginalized people at the expense of our own humanity.
Eventually, some of us (humans) won't be able to worry so much about engineering heaven-on-demand, as it were, when suddenly we find ourselves limited in ways we never could've imagined or ever hope to escape from.
People will continue to point and laugh by way of social media, but for how long and at what, or more importantly, whose expense? These are serious questions, which the general public has been plainly ignoring until recently- and that's being entirely overly-favorable.
The advent of the smartphone and touchscreen is essentially the defining characteristic of Web 2.0 and we haven't really approached Web 3.0+ in any meaningful way, in my experience. However, I am not a computer architecture/hw guru, yet I still expect the future to be pleasantly surprising despite this, erm, rather unnecessarily difficult time.
Yes, but I'd describe it more like Web 2.5 is basically the gross-weaponization of gossip as a glorified get-rich-quick pyramid scheme. There is little-to-no reason for this mode of thinking in 2024 and beyond, if we are to realize anything resembling actual human potential.
Until a more equitable society exists, we will likely not see a legitimate Web 3.0+, in my estimation.
Full disclosure: I'm a cusper Xillenial who thinks Elon Musk is an idiot and hopes he can find some actual value somewhere hidden in the depths of his colossal failures, plural.
To me, it seems the homeless may actually be a burden of society. Might widely-held definitions of "burden on society" be specious, at best? Like, I'm sure there's data that could convince many people they are right about what constitutes societal burden, but these are not necessarily people looking for answers; yes, these are people looking for problems, which is needed to an extent, but they are more likely simply confirming their own biases, which is not all that necessary.
My other answer is: I am seriously interested in current & future definitions of work and would like to hear from others working in software development, support, and/or analysis. I draw purposeful comparison to someone from the past who is vastly underrepresented in those areas out of curiosity & hope, thank you!
I'm new here, but nice one! Thanks for sharing the experience. Huge fan of Legowelkt. I've got to play alongside some '70s CTI records or something next time!