It's the old game that he's trying to preserve. It's time to move on to the new game. When the landscape shifts beneath you, its very low probability that the existing structures on the landscape are a good fit for the new landscape, and the structures on the new landscape must be rethought from first principles.
not derailing, just pointing out effective ways of producing good which is what i was responding to. i think its good for people to be aware of this. those people are all examples of people who have influenced culture for bad. you can do it for good: bryan johnson, civil rights leaders, leftist streamers. andrew tate was just the most effective, recent, and obvious one which is why I pointed him out.
I suppose you would need to weigh the utility points lost from people no longer enjoying their jobs with the positive utility points gained by the consumers of products and services.
My intuition is that with the law of leverage in mind, the former would be relatively low and the latter would be relatively high.
It is of course up to the government and culture to minimize the former and maximize the latter.
for fear of being overly utilitarian here its not really an issue that people are manipulatable but that they are manipulated into doing the wrong things (consumerism, political divide-and-conquer strategies)
and rejecting manipulation from a deontological stance reduces agency and output for doing good in the real world
manipulation = campaigns = advertisements = psyops (all the same, different connotations)
Irrelevant but I like this pattern of using Gemini (or AI outputs in general) as sources. Please continue to do so and I encourage any readers to also adopt this pattern. I will also try to implement this pattern.
Right. I think ai on the user's side is going to be necessary soon. Then they can negotiate with the advertiser's AI to determine what to show. This will need to be on the platform level or the hardware level.
This solves the problem of seeing ads that are not best for the user.