With the rapid advancements in AI jargon and AI-related rhetoric by Silicon Valley startups in pursuit lucrative venture capital and it doesn't seem that this problem should be too hard to resolve.
Well, go ahead Europe, take responsibility for your own defense and quit letting the fact that the US is responsible for preventing your precious little countries from being wiped off the map from preventing you from "standing up to them".
The current power dynamic was 100% the point of the post-WW2 treaties. It was considered too dangerous for European countries to have actual sovereignty, largely on account of the fact that they'd just plunged the West into the most deadly conflict in human history. In exchange for being neutered militarily, Europe could rebuild their broken countries and indulge in every fantastical "socialist" policy they could dream up while Uncle Sam made sure the Russians we'd so recklessly empowered didn't conquer all of Europe.
Now that Europe is so thoroughly deluded to believe that their continued existence doesn't actually depend entirely on the US, they're making pathetic mewlings about how evil and mean the US is. Well go on then, make your EU army or whatever and quit letting Uncle Sam push you around. So sorry if that means you can't keep devoting your entire GDP's to feel-good social programs and insane migration policies. Gonna need to work a bit harder for that EUtopia, aren't you?
People haven't changed significantly since the dawn of civilization, but now we're so immersed in useless information that it's little wonder people are losing their perspective on things. Reality has gotten so complicated that we can barely comprehend it, and it's only going to get worse. Yet the drums of Science beat on, as though making things even more incomprehensible to the average human will all just kind of work itself out in the end.
I guess the egghead technocrats are counting on some magical AI to do all the thinking for us since even they won't be able to understand more than a fraction of the system either, despite their ginormous intellect. Just shut up and do whatever the computer tells you to, and when things go wrong you can simply blame the algorithm. Nothing like a complete lack of accountability to make things work out for the best, right?
It's kind of funny that those researchers only got huffy about their research being used for military purposes but all the social engineering and other fuckery Google does is just fine.
I'm sure they unironically believe the US military exists for the explicit purpose of killing brown people and that Google just wants to "make the world a better place".
If they want precrime algorithms and AI to ensure no one is smoking or drinking sugary beverages then more power to them, as long as they keep their technocratic dystopia confined to NYC they can do whatever they want.
Religions are not ideologies because religion developed in a time before the concept of ideology existed. Someone who sets down to create an ideology is doing something entirely different to the ways religions in the past got their start. Even if we, with our enlightened modern rationality, can see the errors of the Prophets, there is no reason to believe they weren't 100% certain that they were, in fact, doing God's will, as they saw it.
I can't stress enough that ideas we take for granted today literally did not exist in the past, and despite the fact that we can look back and say "Yep, religion and ideologies are kinda similar" does not in any way imply that those in the past had any idea they weren't adhering, through their religion, to an accurate description of reality. When people make breakthrough discoveries in philosophy, ethics, or morality these are brand new ideas which did not exist before and therefore cannot be attributed as the motivations of people before the idea even existed.
The mistake you're making is the Religion "big lie" wasn't a big lie, they had no access to the kind of scientific measurements, nor even the conception that such a thing was possible and therefore no reason to consider the stories they told to be untrue. Do you really think the entire history of religious thought is just a bunch of cynical bullshit created completely from nothing by the elites (who, by the way, had no more access to the kind of mindset required to do so than the lower classes did)?
Religious skeptics make this basic mistake over and over, these religions developed in a time before there was such a thing as the scientific method, before anyone had any idea that the reality around them was made of atoms and the laws of physics. Dirt was dirt, not some special kind of matter made up of molecules and chemical processes. These things didn't play into the conception of anything and we, as "enlightened Modern humans" with our materialistic conception of reality can't wrap our minds around how people used to think in a way that is entirely alien to how we think now.
You can thank Marx for this absurd notion of religion as mystical fiction perpetuated cynically by the elites to control the lower classes. It's gonna take a lot more proof than ol' Karl's bald assertions that the elites were any less believers in the local religion than the commoners were. It barely even stands to reason, let alone historical fact.
This is all orientalist nonsense. The Buddhists don't have any magical answers, they aren't better people than the rest of us, they aren't more "free from material reality". Ignorant westerners latch on to the mystical mumbo jumbo and play pretend that these exotic foreigners must have some access to knowledge beyond the understanding of Western science. It's ignorant fetishism of that which is different to the "ordinary" experience of Westerners who have fooled themselves into thinking their supremely rational and then realized pretending to be a Vulcan wasn't so fucking great after all.
I'm not reading your whole unformatted diatribe, however I do want to point out that religion in Modernity is completely different to religion in pre-Modernity. We're all materialists these days, everything is made of up atoms and matter and set into motion by the laws of physics; everything we see, hear, and think is an entirely physical phenomena that can be studied and understood. Pre-Modern man had no such notion, at least not widely. They believed their religion to be true in a way we simply cannot: it was reality, not some pseudo-scientific explanation of reality to be studied and harnessed to the human will. That change in mindset was the death of God, not pedantic skepticism or the scientific method.
Naw, I suspect we're pretty easy to maintain. The real difference in how we will survive will be determined if we are seen by the AIs as being like pigeons and rats or cats and dogs.
And people are willingly advancing the prospect of this scenario actually coming to pass? What the hell is the point of AI and "scientific progress" if it eliminates those who created it in the first place?
This is the part that people call religious, it's insane.
Well did the fucking Heritage foundation travel into the future from 1989 and enact it? No? Maybe they used their spooky Think Tank mind control and coerced Obama into doing it? No? Well shit, looks like Obama is on the hook for thinking that drivel was a good idea and putting it into law, regardless of who came up with the idea in the first place.
I do kind of like how you think the simple fact that some neo-con think tank came up with an idea means anyone, anywhere, is obligated to look favorably on it for any reason whatsoever.
Just shut the fuck up moron, you're punching outside your weight.
All it's going to ever be used for is oppression on a scale we can barely conceive. Just think what could be done with the absurd quantity of data the NSA is slurping up, all in anticipation of an "AI" to process it and come to biased and fallacious conclusions! Having some fucking algorithm deduce which citizens are problematic and flagging them to be "taken care of" sounds like progress to me! There's just no way such a system could possibly have a false positive rate so high that it's practically useless for its stated purpose, I refuse to believe it!
Not only that, but it's still going to have to use the existing Office App data model which is half of why VBA is such a clusterfuck in the first place. Which is to say a bunch of bizarre COM bindings and related retardation.
This little misapprehension is almost certainly the cause of the current terrorism in western Europe.
"Oh I'm sure they pre-screened these migrants coming from the third world, they must have because to believe otherwise would be too big a blow to my ridiculously optimistic views about government!"
Slashdot Mirror
Let's rephrase:
With the rapid advancements in AI jargon and AI-related rhetoric by Silicon Valley startups in pursuit lucrative venture capital and it doesn't seem that this problem should be too hard to resolve.
Well, go ahead Europe, take responsibility for your own defense and quit letting the fact that the US is responsible for preventing your precious little countries from being wiped off the map from preventing you from "standing up to them".
The current power dynamic was 100% the point of the post-WW2 treaties. It was considered too dangerous for European countries to have actual sovereignty, largely on account of the fact that they'd just plunged the West into the most deadly conflict in human history. In exchange for being neutered militarily, Europe could rebuild their broken countries and indulge in every fantastical "socialist" policy they could dream up while Uncle Sam made sure the Russians we'd so recklessly empowered didn't conquer all of Europe.
Now that Europe is so thoroughly deluded to believe that their continued existence doesn't actually depend entirely on the US, they're making pathetic mewlings about how evil and mean the US is. Well go on then, make your EU army or whatever and quit letting Uncle Sam push you around. So sorry if that means you can't keep devoting your entire GDP's to feel-good social programs and insane migration policies. Gonna need to work a bit harder for that EUtopia, aren't you?
People haven't changed significantly since the dawn of civilization, but now we're so immersed in useless information that it's little wonder people are losing their perspective on things. Reality has gotten so complicated that we can barely comprehend it, and it's only going to get worse. Yet the drums of Science beat on, as though making things even more incomprehensible to the average human will all just kind of work itself out in the end.
I guess the egghead technocrats are counting on some magical AI to do all the thinking for us since even they won't be able to understand more than a fraction of the system either, despite their ginormous intellect. Just shut up and do whatever the computer tells you to, and when things go wrong you can simply blame the algorithm. Nothing like a complete lack of accountability to make things work out for the best, right?
I'm sure Google just now started doing military contracts, and haven't been an ostensible arm of USMIL all along
It's kind of funny that those researchers only got huffy about their research being used for military purposes but all the social engineering and other fuckery Google does is just fine.
I'm sure they unironically believe the US military exists for the explicit purpose of killing brown people and that Google just wants to "make the world a better place".
Yep, better let the central planners take care of everything, they know best anyhow.
If they want precrime algorithms and AI to ensure no one is smoking or drinking sugary beverages then more power to them, as long as they keep their technocratic dystopia confined to NYC they can do whatever they want.
Stop asking questions. Don't you have some superhero movies to consume?
Incomprehensible product lines works for Google, so why not Microsoft?
It would presumably be a way to monetize their service, although why anyone would want to trade Zuckerbucks for USD is beyond me.
WE WUZ MIRRORS 'N SHIEEET!
...and then the Butlerian Jihad!
Religions are not ideologies because religion developed in a time before the concept of ideology existed. Someone who sets down to create an ideology is doing something entirely different to the ways religions in the past got their start. Even if we, with our enlightened modern rationality, can see the errors of the Prophets, there is no reason to believe they weren't 100% certain that they were, in fact, doing God's will, as they saw it.
I can't stress enough that ideas we take for granted today literally did not exist in the past, and despite the fact that we can look back and say "Yep, religion and ideologies are kinda similar" does not in any way imply that those in the past had any idea they weren't adhering, through their religion, to an accurate description of reality. When people make breakthrough discoveries in philosophy, ethics, or morality these are brand new ideas which did not exist before and therefore cannot be attributed as the motivations of people before the idea even existed.
The mistake you're making is the Religion "big lie" wasn't a big lie, they had no access to the kind of scientific measurements, nor even the conception that such a thing was possible and therefore no reason to consider the stories they told to be untrue. Do you really think the entire history of religious thought is just a bunch of cynical bullshit created completely from nothing by the elites (who, by the way, had no more access to the kind of mindset required to do so than the lower classes did)?
Religious skeptics make this basic mistake over and over, these religions developed in a time before there was such a thing as the scientific method, before anyone had any idea that the reality around them was made of atoms and the laws of physics. Dirt was dirt, not some special kind of matter made up of molecules and chemical processes. These things didn't play into the conception of anything and we, as "enlightened Modern humans" with our materialistic conception of reality can't wrap our minds around how people used to think in a way that is entirely alien to how we think now.
You can thank Marx for this absurd notion of religion as mystical fiction perpetuated cynically by the elites to control the lower classes. It's gonna take a lot more proof than ol' Karl's bald assertions that the elites were any less believers in the local religion than the commoners were. It barely even stands to reason, let alone historical fact.
This is all orientalist nonsense. The Buddhists don't have any magical answers, they aren't better people than the rest of us, they aren't more "free from material reality". Ignorant westerners latch on to the mystical mumbo jumbo and play pretend that these exotic foreigners must have some access to knowledge beyond the understanding of Western science. It's ignorant fetishism of that which is different to the "ordinary" experience of Westerners who have fooled themselves into thinking their supremely rational and then realized pretending to be a Vulcan wasn't so fucking great after all.
I'm not reading your whole unformatted diatribe, however I do want to point out that religion in Modernity is completely different to religion in pre-Modernity. We're all materialists these days, everything is made of up atoms and matter and set into motion by the laws of physics; everything we see, hear, and think is an entirely physical phenomena that can be studied and understood. Pre-Modern man had no such notion, at least not widely. They believed their religion to be true in a way we simply cannot: it was reality, not some pseudo-scientific explanation of reality to be studied and harnessed to the human will. That change in mindset was the death of God, not pedantic skepticism or the scientific method.
Naw, I suspect we're pretty easy to maintain. The real difference in how we will survive will be determined if we are seen by the AIs as being like pigeons and rats or cats and dogs.
And people are willingly advancing the prospect of this scenario actually coming to pass? What the hell is the point of AI and "scientific progress" if it eliminates those who created it in the first place?
This is the part that people call religious, it's insane.
The "Space Nutter" is a sub-sect of the religion of Scientism.
Well did the fucking Heritage foundation travel into the future from 1989 and enact it? No? Maybe they used their spooky Think Tank mind control and coerced Obama into doing it? No? Well shit, looks like Obama is on the hook for thinking that drivel was a good idea and putting it into law, regardless of who came up with the idea in the first place.
I do kind of like how you think the simple fact that some neo-con think tank came up with an idea means anyone, anywhere, is obligated to look favorably on it for any reason whatsoever.
Just shut the fuck up moron, you're punching outside your weight.
All it's going to ever be used for is oppression on a scale we can barely conceive. Just think what could be done with the absurd quantity of data the NSA is slurping up, all in anticipation of an "AI" to process it and come to biased and fallacious conclusions! Having some fucking algorithm deduce which citizens are problematic and flagging them to be "taken care of" sounds like progress to me! There's just no way such a system could possibly have a false positive rate so high that it's practically useless for its stated purpose, I refuse to believe it!
Don't forget CRISPR! The Genetic Revolution is Just Around The Corner guys, I can feel it.
The EU government just doesn't want any competition in the data abuse racket.
Not only that, but it's still going to have to use the existing Office App data model which is half of why VBA is such a clusterfuck in the first place. Which is to say a bunch of bizarre COM bindings and related retardation.
Plenty learned from it, seeing as how it's an instruction manual and all.
A warning... how cute.
From OP:
I'm sure they already pre-screened me somehow
This little misapprehension is almost certainly the cause of the current terrorism in western Europe.
"Oh I'm sure they pre-screened these migrants coming from the third world, they must have because to believe otherwise would be too big a blow to my ridiculously optimistic views about government!"