> To fix this, AI companies should refocus their goals to account for the displacement of human roles as they continue to improve AIs. They should start doing that sooner rather than later.
It's a good thing then, that corporations have such a good reputation for never externalizing the costs their products inflict on society & the planet.
Spending some time in Germany from Holland I notice there is a significant difference in cycling etiquette :)
Especially regarding “passing a cyclist” which also touches on the essential difficulty with having only one “ring” sound.
Always when Germans pass me on the bike and they ring I get slightly annoyed because I interpret it as a “get out of the way” ring, and I feel like there is enough space. But perhaps it’s just the cautious “don’t do anything unexpected” ring.
A Dutch person would rarely ring at another cyclist in the former way. But they also might be less safety focused while cycling (see also: helmet usage). Or we have safer infrastructure already.
On a road bike, however, I too ring at pedestrians “preemptively”. For sure GPs remark of “if you need to ring you’re going too fast” applies here but that’s the essence of road cycling.
Ironically I’m also annoyed when road cyclists ring at me for the same reason.
Just shows the case for having 2 clearly different types of rings.
I might have to reexamine my attitudes: the entire article felt AI-written to me, which instantly reduced my appetite for reading it.
Which is unfair of course.
A) I don’t even know whether it was actually was written by AI and
B) even if it was, it still encapsulates a human’s potentially worthwhile thoughts and experiences.
But.. undeniably genAI will lead to a much greater volume of text being written so we’ll all have to be even more selective in what we read and what not?