s3ri0usJo0s
s3ri0usJo0s t1_j342ad1 wrote
It's not change but theology that's the problem; meaning, purpose, direction.
Ex: If you can't agree that a nation can be sovereign and determine its own future, you're gonna justify invasion and violence as a necessary evil. Drones and deep fakes litter the battlefield as nonchalantly as soda cans.
s3ri0usJo0s t1_j1zt4l6 wrote
Reply to comment by dependswho in If the singularity came to pass, would you upload yourself? by gbbloom
Yep Ive had decades of not having all parts of me in-sync. I'd like tech to work on piecing me together, not carving me up 🤕
s3ri0usJo0s t1_j391pqc wrote
Reply to comment by thebestmtgplayer in The future: our POV (ft. AIart issue) by thebestmtgplayer
Thank you for giving my post extra consideration!
Tldr: the collusion between money and mass reprduction tech ends in poverty for most and prosperity for the few.
In my law enforcement career I just never had a story end well where money and mass production colluded and usually traded in prophecies versus pure speculation. (Anthropomorphising here).
Ex: I'm checking into the AI debate and look at what always comes up: money and "the bright big financial opportunities awaits!" selling shtick I have seen with ponzi schemes, drug busts, and even MLMs. Then there's the Robinhood app and Bitcoin, to use recent financial cases.
Tech is good until we write rules for me (so I win) and rules for thee (so I win). Win-win for me but not for thee. Speculation is good until it's passed off as prophecy.