Submitted by [deleted] t3_116ehts in singularity
helpskinissues t1_j974yr8 wrote
Reply to comment by PandaCommando69 in Human Intelligence augmentation is probably more dangerous than regular AI by [deleted]
The lack of political knowledge in this sub is crystal clear, as you seem to misunderstand that peace, good, bad, violence... Aren't agreed concepts.
What is good for you can be bad for me.
PandaCommando69 t1_j976pa2 wrote
Your comment is arrogant, and displays a lack of ethics and morals.
Causing suffering is wrong. Oppressing other people is wrong. Taking people's freedom and liberty is wrong. Peace is always preferable to war, and violence in service of anything other than self-defense is wrong.
helpskinissues t1_j976zlw wrote
What I'm saying is that "suffering", "oppression", "freedom", "liberty", "peace", "war", "violence" and "self defense" are subjective terms without consensus in our societies.
I'm shocked I'm having this discussion. Don't you watch the news? We're literally having a war in Ukraine and nobody agrees what is good or bad, what is self defense or what is peace.
PandaCommando69 t1_j977fwh wrote
Russia attacked Ukraine unprovoked. They are in the wrong.
You are correct that some people do not understand what right and wrong are. That does not mean that right and wrong do not exist. Sometimes there are gray areas, and in these we need to be judicious in balancing competing interests, but that does not mean that we cannot tell right from wrong, and by pushing that narrative, you are advocating for the very type of moral ambiguity that you are pretending to decry.
helpskinissues t1_j977o7o wrote
I'm not decrying anything, I'm literally saying "I'll do good, I hope everyone does" doesn't stop wars, violence, crimes or anything like that. Because they're empty words without meanings in this society.
"Some people don't understand what is right" lol, okay, explain that to the criminal while he's shooting you thinking he's doing good.
PandaCommando69 t1_j9783cq wrote
You're not being very clear about the points you're trying to make. I do not know if that is by design, or because your thoughts on this topic are still under construction.
helpskinissues t1_j978ce2 wrote
The only point I'm making is that you're saying AI could do good because of people doing good. What I'm saying is that people doing good can mean people doing bad to others.
The difference between a supervillain and a guardian angel is null. Different people have different meanings.
"AI could make people do good", sure, the type of good that is killing people on Ukraine and billions of people are supporting?
PandaCommando69 t1_j9790lc wrote
Yes, oppressors do get awfully upset about not being able to oppress other people, and definitely think that having their ability to cause harm curtailed is a bad thing. They are wrong. (EX: homophobes who think their rights are being violated because gay people have been allowed to marry. Their rights have not been violated, merely their ability to oppress other people curtailed.) The difference is not null.
helpskinissues t1_j97964v wrote
To them, a gay is a villain, to you, the homophobe is a villain. As simple as that. They'll both use AI to do "good". One to be gay, other to be homophobe.
PandaCommando69 t1_j979i4j wrote
A gay person existing cannot possibly be villainous. Thinking otherwise is a complete logical fallacy. Anyone seeking to oppress another person on the basis of this logical fallacy, is committing wrong. Their intellectual failings don't change the objective truth.
turnip_burrito t1_j97f7mu wrote
Morals aren't objective.
helpskinissues t1_j979mnv wrote
And they'll say the same of your thinking.
PandaCommando69 t1_j979s5e wrote
Yes, but they would objectively be incorrect. That's the difference.
helpskinissues t1_j97aoel wrote
That won't stop the bullet.
PandaCommando69 t1_j97b4n9 wrote
Did you hear me say somewhere that I thought that being in the right was impenetrable armor against someone doing something awful? I didn't. I sure do wish that it was though, that would be very nice.
helpskinissues t1_j97bjkm wrote
>If I get super intelligence I'm going to use it to protect (and give freedom to) as much sentient life as I can, for as long as I am able. I mean it. I hope others will do the same
To me, this is inviting others to trigger the gun, then you'll cry because it's "bad" that they tried to do good using AI. But hey, this thread is getting nowhere. I appreciate your responses, really. But I have 10000 things to do.
PandaCommando69 t1_j97bw7d wrote
Your reply honestly does not make sense. Have a good rest of your day.
rixtil41 t1_j97dcrn wrote
Same to you. As there is no such thing as objective morals, which is what you seem to imply.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments