Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

fwubglubbel t1_j44pjqh wrote

Don't waste your time with this book unless you are into right wing nutjob conspiracy theories. It starts with some nonsensical gibberish from a techno-illiterate techstock snake oil salesman claiming that Moore's Law has been exponentially surpassed by "AI computing power", whatever that means.

Then it talks about "important and urgent challenges affecting employment trends" where it refers to the COVID-19 pandemic as "biological agents released into the environment" and vaccine side effects as "Therapeutic-related Injuries", quoting the conspiracy website Gateway Pundit as a source.

It also refers to COVID restrictions as "sate-provoked blockages to their ability to make a living" (sic).

That's when I stopped reading.

13

ronin_khan OP t1_j45484b wrote

Thank you for your constructive comment. All feedback is good feedback and an opportunity to grow and learn.

>> Don't waste your time with this book

I agree with you, nobody should waste their time, and that's one of the main messages of the book. I agree with you

>> unless you are into right wing nutjob conspiracy theories

Well, I see you did not read the rest of the book, or you would have seen that I am not either into right wing or left wing anything. Precisely I consider that we are being manipulated into division through these imaginary lines of thought / philosophies. I hope not, but your comment could be an example of it

>> It starts with some nonsensical gibberish from a techno-illiterate techstock snake oil salesman

lol that was great and very creative. I've been called things before, but never that one. I like it!

>> snake oil salesman

Well, this is an interesting point. I am not actually trying to sell you anything, including the book, that is free, but ok.

>> where it refers to the COVID-19 pandemic as "biological agents released into the environment"

The exact paragraph you're quoting is "Release of biological agents into the environment – As we have seen in the 2020 sanitary crisis, whether real or hyped by the media, threats to our individual health and how we deal with them, can affect our present and future, in very radical ways. Unfortunately, our apparent inability to learn from our past actions in these areas is also responsible for creating and perpetuating social conditions that may result in further psychological and economic damage to our societies."

Perhaps I should explain myself better in that paragraph, as I wasn't talking about the COVID-19 pandemic so much in that, as to the COVID-19 pandemic and anything else that may be proven to be the release by someone -anyone- into the environment. For example, the sarin gas attack in the Tokyo metro many years ago.

Nanotechnology and other technologies make it easier than ever before for anyone to create potentially dangerous substances that can effect great harm to those exposed to them, either in a temporary o persistent manner.

Please suggest a better way to explain it if you wish, and I'll consider changing that paragraph. I did not want my book to be written by an AI, and I needed each point to be brief, so those constraints -and the fact I am writing in my second language- prevent me from detailing exactly what you mean.

>> and vaccine side effects as "Therapeutic-related Injuries"

Unfortunately, as you can see on my source in that comment and other information appearing on the news every day, the American Heart Association and others, not me, are finding that whatever we were given during the pandemic, may be harmful, at least for some people. If you don't agree, I understand, we can all have an opinion, but it's not what the American Heart Association's researchers seems to have found or are saying. And you will agree with me that if the "experts" say so, one way or another, it must be true, otherwise, if we don't believe the experts, we run the risk of becoming right wing nutjob conspiracy theorists, and we don't want that.

>> quoting the conspiracy website Gateway Pundit as a source.

Unfortunately I don't have time to research in depth the present and past actions of each website I quote, or know exactly what they have written in the past. My sources are just an invitation for people to learn more about what I say. If I am wrong I am open to a constructive debate on where I am wrong. If you have a better link, please post it here and we can all learn from it. I am interested in the TRUTH above anything else, so if I am wrong show me and I'll tell you "you're right", no problem. Precisely everyone thinking that they hold THE TRUTH and they can't be wrong, is a big part of our problem.

Edit: I have now updated the link to the exact study instead, coming from a website owned by the American Medical Association, as stated in the terms of use of the website. Thanks for your suggestion.

>> It also refers to COVID restrictions as "sate-provoked blockages to their ability to make a living"

Yes, I could have been much harsher on that point, but I wanted to be diplomatic. I know some people who had to close their business due to this, and it led to banruptcy of a perfectly functioning business, divorce and important trauma for the family. I am not sure we should have been so quick to stop society so rapidly, yes, and I think the power of the state to prevent individuals from making a living should be used very carefully.

We must understand that not in every country people had government subsidies. In some countries people were just left out of options.

>> That's when I stopped reading.

It's good that you stopped reading. I wouldn't want you to feel uncomfortable, or to find out that I am apolitical, when you read more of the book. We should only read books from authors we agree with and like. That's the way forward!

Thanks again for your comment. I have a bit of a different opinion on engaging with people who think differently from me, and I think I can learn from everyone. And thanks again for your description of me. Made me laugh! I think I'll never forget it

−6

fwubglubbel t1_j45ag0u wrote

>It starts with some nonsensical gibberish from a techno-illiterate techstock snake oil salesman

That wasn't referring to you, but your source, Jeff Brown, who obviously knows nothing about technology. He just hawks get rich quick investment schemes (if he really knew how to get rich from tech stocks, he wouldn't have to sell investment advice for a living).

The graph he uses shows a single line with Moore's law, then "AI computing usage", which has nothing to do with Moore's law. It's like saying that buses are faster than race cars because the use of buses has increased.

The fact that neither you nor your source understand that loses you all credibility.

The same thing with the COVID nonsense. Whether you are apolitical or not, your source is a right wing nutjob conspiracy website.

You need fact based, peer reviewed, credible sources in order to write a useful book.

4

ronin_khan OP t1_j45bkl9 wrote

I see what you mean, but your assertions seem a bit radical. X person "knows nothing about technology". Y person "loses all credibility"...Z thing is "covid nonsense". What makes you so angry? Ok let's see. Your point about that source is taken, and I'll review the paragraph or consider removing the quote from Brown, if it creates confusion. My point is that growth is exponential, not linear. Yes, Moore's law was about processing capacity.

Regarding my "conspiracy" source, I have already changed it to the original source, and made a comment in the other post, that you may have overlooked, and it's ok. The new source is the original study, posted on a website owned by the American Medical Association, cited elsewhere in this post (I think a few lines up). I hope you're happy with the change, or that association is also without credibility for you?

Regarding sources, I don't agree with you that only peer-reviewed sources are credible, as you seem to imply. We only have to look at what's happening int he world to see that the "experts" know a lot less than we thought, even if "peer reviewed".

I also disagree that a book cannot be useful just because you disagreew with it in some points. You may want to consider to just take what is useful and discard the rest. We can learn from everyone and everything.

Thanks for your feedback again!

1

abjedhowiz t1_j465gr9 wrote

I didn’t read it but I think its an opinion piece and should be read as fiction. I’m sure if he wrote it well from the perspective of fiction it would sell well. Like The Circle. When anyone blabs about society the way they see it, I’m not sure what genre that fits into. I think they fictionalize it further to make it fit into the fiction genre. Or is this a new type of genre for our day and age without publishers and peer review. Much just like how people digest info from social media comments.

0

CircaSixty8 t1_j46dgno wrote

Wait you didn't read it, but you have all this to say about it?

2