>But I stick to my point that healthcare is a product and the only nuance is who is paying.

We also have a right to a certain amount of security. That's why countries have armies and police forces. Those (ideally/theoretically) exist for defence and to maintain orders so citizens can pursue happiness and not get raided by hordes of barbarians or assaulted or what have you. That's what government are supposed to exist for. As a society we decide that something is important for everyone, we put our money in a big pool and we use the pool to ensure that the underlying right is secured.

It works for the army and the police in the US, it also works for healthcare elsewhere.

Of course it's not free and someone pays for it. Same as roads and fire stations. You don't pay when you need them, they're paid for from taxes because they help society function (and healthy citizenry can be argued to also do that).

I don't see how your ignorance/google ineptitude really has anything to do with me... and why I should be given homework to compensate for your apparent lazyness... so I'll give you the first result on my google research:

>Article 36 (3) of our Constitution emphasizes the obligation to protect the national health of the nation by stipulating that “all citizens are protected by the state in relation to health.” This means that the right to health as a social fundamental right is the most important aspect of health rights.

That would be S. Korea.

Also, (bonus down the google research) the EU Charter of Fundamental rights has it so Citizens of any European country that recognize that Charter as valid would have a right to health care even if their country doesn't specify it in it's own constitution. So there's that too.

Lastly, it was an intentional use of the meme, but IF I had brain worms, I could get my head checked for free since I don't live in a third world country.

Justice is made up. Good and evil is made up. Those are all concepts that mean different things to different people from different time and culture. It means what it means.

When I say something is a right, it is meant as "in a proper society, it should be treated with the same importance we give to other rights".

Nothing has inherent meaning. Meaning is something we construct to not go insane from a meaningless universe because our brain has evolved to recognize patterns as a way to improve our chances of survival and has gotten too good at it for our own comfort.

Hope for the best and prepare for the worst.

It is currently being studied by Dr. David Sinclair and showing great promises.

First: all rights are made up. Second some country have it in there constitution that healthcare is one of the right enjoyed by their citizens. So that's that. You being ignorant about them doesn't change the facts and reality of how people live. You may not like it but this is what peak human rights look like.

Look up Yamanaka factors. Cells can be deaged.

All the convenience of printers and the pleasure of heart surgery? Is this heaven?

Repoman was a documentary.

Healthcare is a right, not a product. As such it is free at the point of service in most of the civilised world.

"What if the super intelligence is actually stupider than ChatGPT currently is?"

​

For real? That's your concern?

Plus there is no telling how enticing an archology could be built with super intelligence. You could pack entire city's worth of people in on skyscrapper that somehow looks good, has parks and ressources in and has roomier quarters than our current appartments and houses.

Well... apart from the whole "Yo dawg, I heard you like AI so I put an AI in your AI so you it can align your AI while you use the AI"

But it is a bit of a dated meme, I'll concede.

I, for one, would like to welcome our new AI overlords.

>True AGI implies that it has its own wants and needs, and would not just be a prompt machine like current AI.

You can have intelligence that doesn't want, at least in theory. I'm sure that there has been a few monks and hermits across history that have been intelligent without desiring much if anything.

Ironically, that was super rude of her.

Indeed. To make a coding analogy: The feeling might be like a functional line of code of their program that nothing else is referencing.

Or they are aromantic. That's fine too. But I don't think what they are asking for (artificial emotions) is unrealistic. Maybe a bit distant though.

But who could we trust in the current system to code and maintain that and not to go ingrain their own bias into it. Alignment is a big issue there.

Just like internet+cellphone brought us Tinder, new technology will be used in unforeseen ways that will seem obvious in retrospect.

We still have billions of year to find a way to make artificial big bangs, reverse entropy or jump to parallel universes, so even the death of the universe might not be the end.

Mandatory plug for r/longevity in case that sort of thing might interest OP.

While I very much agree that experience (including that of past mistakes, yours or otherwise) is a component of wisdom, I would say that knowledge and good judgment are also components. Otherwise, if it were purely experience/mistakes based, wisdom would offer no benefit when facing new situations... which, maybe under your conception of wisdom, a highly intangible concept, is entirely possible to be honest.

In that regard, someone's wisdom is like... how adequate a guidance does the sum of their general rule of thumb and mental shortcuts is to take decisions that don't suck.

Lots of things can have contributed to that pool of general principles a given individual has.

What is commonly know as "wisdom" in the common parlance. But available to all.

"I know jujitsu" et cetera, et cetera...