Refusing to reduce complex reality into slogans and clichés since 19XX
Probably not. At least I can’t think of a single reason that would explain this. I can however come up with reasons why one might be tempted to think that even if it wasn’t true.
Interestingly, I don’t know a single religious person so I have zero anecdotal evidence to reference to.
That’s 99.9% of people. Unless you’re a head of state or in some other way in highly influential or powerful position you’ve got nothing to worry about. You can never completely cover your tracks online. The best you can do is make it difficult enough for people to track you that they go with someone else instead. It’s also good practice to reming yourself of what the actual threat model is. Who do you want to stay hidden from?
It doesn’t take much to lose a stalker but if it’s big tech you’re trying to hide from then all you need is a cable cutter.
Consumers stopping consuming is devastating for the economy and will immediately bite them back harder. What’s far better is them having the means to consume and also doing so.
Prices have always kept rising. That’s called an inflation and it’s a good thing for the economy when it stays modes and people’s wages increase too. That’s why your grandparents bought a house for 40k that now costs half a million. The value of the house haven’t necessarily gone up, just the price of it in absolute monetary terms. 40k just got you more back then.
Just staring at increasing prices as if it’s happening in vacuum is missing the full story.
whatever are male bimbos called, for example?
Bimbo is italian and it means a male-infant. The femine equivalent is bimba.
Nowhere is it written that an actual AGI system would be aligned with the hopes and desires of its creator. That’s a baseless assumption that we shouln’t take as gospel.
That has nothing to do with your original claim.
There doesn’t exists an agreed upon definition for what we mean by “intelligence” which makes this a bit strange claim to make. What are you actually even saying?
I don’t see him claiming AI would do that. He very clearly says that he hopes this would be the case.
That pretty much aligns with what I said about this a few days back in a different thread:
Humans are inherently flawed. Even the best ones are biased, emotional, irrational and easily manipulated. My (perhaps) unpopular opinion is that politics will never run like a well-oiled machine that treats everyone fairly for as long as they’re run by people.
A truly benign, aligned and independent AGI system is the only thing I can even imagine that could at least in theory offer the kind of governing system we actually need. And I truly mean an independent agent with our well-being as the guiding principle. Not one with an inbuilt bias toward who made it.
Now, whether that’ll ever be actually possible is a different story but the “best case scenario” for a human-run government and an AI-run government are light-years apart.
Just the kind of headline the people who don’t like rich people are likely to engage with.
How can you tell? It might very well be considering how many fancy words were used there. Nothing about that reads as not-AI.
What’s your issue with Tom Hanks?
It is censored. Just in a unconventional manner.
That technique doesn’t work here. This isn’t a video and it haven’t been pixelated either.
How is it easy to bypass?
You don’t. You go purely on vibes.
Aware by Anthony De Mello stands out as a book that’s not quite written like a book.
Sorry, but what’s the witch hunt for again?
And what?
“Hey! You the guy who posted on Lemmy??”