Thanks to you, for your positive comment. I hope it's useful to you somehow and it gives you a new idea or helps you to see a different angle on thoughts you were already having! Let me know what you think when you finish it! All feedback welcome.

I understand, don't worry. Don't read it, if you're so much into credentials it's probably not for you and I don't want you to waste your time. I am serious, not trying to be a jerk either. I am just a very curious person and so I can't understand your point of view. Thanks anyway for your comment Rajvagli. If you read it anyway, let me know what you think after!

Thanks man, yes, I am, and you can't imagine how much comments like yours help! It's painful, yes. You've done it too? If so link me to it, I am interested. Also, if you ever have the time to read more of the book and want to let me know more weaknesses of it, I am all ears. It's not nice when someone criticizes your work, but it's necessary. My work is not perfect but can be better with feedback like yours, if I am willing to leave my ego aside and listen.

Thanks for writing that dbtng! Will carefully look at your points one by one and how I can improve on my writing. It´s unfortunate you only read 10 pages, but I understand. If there's one or more interesting books on this topic you would recommend, please let me know. If they´re not technical better, since the technical aspects of all this interest me less than the societal ones, as you can see.

I agree with you about talking about yourself. Will check that too. People don't care about us, they care about them. You're right. Any particular passage that annoyed you?

It's hard to write about all these concepts when you want to be brief, but yes, I understand that the "everything free" point may be confusing. Will revise.

About "if the service is free, the product is you", you're wrong, I "got the memo" and I know this concept very well for many years now...but didn't want to use such cliche we have all heard 1000 times, also in this book. My biggest challenge was to try to make the book short and stay on topic, make it clear for people that read probably a lot less than you or me. As you can see I also think in the form of many threads at once, so herding all the cats is hard sometimes and the writing may get confusing to readers. (one of my previous books was 348 pages precisely because I wanted to make each point in detail...and I didn´t want to torture my readers that way again! This time I prefer to point them in one direction, and then my book to complement what they already know with interesting points or ideas...or for the book to be a good introduction to someone completely unrelated to reddit, futurology, etc.. I wanted it to be more a book that a non-tech family member could understand)

About "an example or two" and giving examples of real companies...I agree with you would have been better, and believe me, I had many in mind, but I didn't want to date the book by referring too much to current events. Due to its nature, the book is not evergreen anyway, but I didn't want it to sound old two months down the line either.

Thanks again. I appreciate constructive criticism

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!

Not sure what you mean? The comment about Moore's law is a quote, as you can see by the little number at the end of that paragraph. It comes from here: https://www.legacyresearch.com/the-daily-cut/growth-in-artificial-intelligence-is-beyond-exponential/

What credentials exactly would make you read it? What kinds of books do you read and by what authors? If I know that I may tell you if reading it is a good investment of your time or not.

>> What gives you insight into how AI will impact the world.

If you are talking about technical credentials, I have taught myself data science and managed a technology company in the past. However, my book is not technical or for a technical audience. I am not sure I understand exactly what you mean or what you want. If you tell me more what kind of credentials would make you happy, I can tell you if I have them or not.

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

Sure! As you'll see in my book, I think collaboration is essential to start the fires that will allow us to somehow make the most out of this. Certainly balance is also very important. I'll be curious to read your book too when you finish it

No problem! I made it free so everyone can read it asap. Regardless of our culture, country or colour, I think it's quite urgent we wake up and work together to change things asap...the enemy is not AI but the way it may be implemented. It's a double-edged sword. We must re-take control. Current politicians of any colour are not going to help us or save us, that's clear. Please let me know what you think when you finish!

Thank you! I'll be here to answer any questions anyone may have. I trust your powerful minds will enjoy the book and somehow find it useful. Even if just a part of it made someone think, or see a different angle on this very important issue... that would be cool.