wantd2B1ofthestrokes

joined 11 months ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

Because of the implication

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

I doubt you would find them as a top result. Sure it would be somewhere in the results, but with the scale it can become an actual problem

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Crypto didn’t go anywhere? Sure it’s not completely eradicated but it’s way less in the mainstream now than it was at its height; and it basically has the rep of being a scam now.

AI is currently used in far more real world use cases than crypto ever was. Maybe it doesn’t take off into infinity but it’s definitely going to be a lot more prevalent

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

I warn of dangers of authentic stupidity in judicial work

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I mostly agree with this. But I can imagine saying basically any system minus x core feature will go to shit.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I think you can say that’s immoral. I’m not sure you can say it will destroy the whole system or that this is an inevitability of any capitalist system.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (15 children)

What are some examples of capitalism destroying itself?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Effective altruism is something that sounds good in principle, and I still think is good in general, though can kind of run out of control.

Sam Bankman Fried was someone who at least claimed to follow this philosophy. The issue being that you can talk yourself into doing bad things (fraud) in the name or earning money that you would then donate much of.

And more generally get into doing “long term” or “big picture” good while also doing a lot of harm. But hey the ends justify the means.

Again, I think the principle of being a lot more calculated in how we do philanthropy is a huge good thing. But the EA movement has had some missteps and probably needs to be reigned in a bit.

Funnily enough Wiki quotes Altman as one of the critics.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I don’t think it’s necessarily true that if we listen to “doomers” we get sensible policy. And it’s probably more likely we get regulatory capture.

But there does exist a sensible middle ground.

I actually think they are correct to bring up the potential upside as something we should consider more in the moral calculus. But the of course it’s taken to a silly extreme.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

You named a bunch of people and companies who are not the subject of the article

view more: next ›