3 ms·

Seriously? An existential threat to society? Taken literally there is a serious need for all involved to get a sense of proportion. Nuclear weaponry are an exis

Seriously? An existential threat to society? Taken literally there is a serious need for all involved to get a sense of proportion. Nuclear weaponry are an existential threat to societies. There are many far more terrible things which are not existential threats wars, coups, purges, and pandemics while horrible are not. The presumed tech demons of social media and big data don't even belong on the list. Taken metaphorically is this the new incarnation of the "ruining society" meme/rhetorical device after it got utterly discredited because society was already ruined by jazz music, women voting, women wearing pants, LGBT people existing in secrecy, rock music, metal, rap, LGBT people existing openly, and many more? If so it is just as insipid as its ancestors. I find the self-flagellation complex of claiming tech to be the well from which all sorrows are drawn, ruiner of the perfect Eden which existed before not only utterly stupid but downright tedious and tiresome.

forgetfreeman 3y ago
Seriously. An existential threat to society. Society requires several things to function. One of those things being a generalized consensus about what things have happened, what things are possible, and what should happen. Plugging your fingers in your ears and shouting nah nah nah isn't a reasonable reaction to the documented changes to society and geopolitcs over the last two decades, most of which can be in some way attributed to social media's warped influence. You correctly mention nuclear weapons being an existential threat yet you fail to acknowledge that deteriorating social and political norms make their use significantly more likely than at any point prior in the last 30 years. A lone individual was able to convince an armed and politically potent minority of the United States that lizard people are real and a threat to children worldwide. These people are now driving a race to the bottom that ends in control of the largest nuclear arsenal on the planet. What's tedious is individuals who have access to enough information to damn well know better playing the part of the frog in the pot of soon-to-be-boiling water.
NovaDudely 3y ago
I have been working on an article about this, broad summary is that things like AI - they can do a damn lot of damage before people figure out how impotent they really are. It isn't the technology I fear, it is how people build grand expectations on the technology and then start throwing people under the bus of the "great god of progress". Those that are first to implement new technology are usually the most reckless, uncaring to the possible blow back provided it benefits them. Those that hold back to analyse the risks many never make it to the market because they are crushed by the move fast people. This is why we have such rampant con's a disinformation nowadays, those that push their ideas and concepts out fastest can generally get a good head start on those that are trying to be more moral or ethical.

forgetfreeman 3y ago

Seriously. An existential threat to society. Society requires several things to function. One of those things being a generalized consensus about what things have happened, what things are possible, and what should happen. Plugging your fingers in your ears and shouting nah nah nah isn't a reasonable reaction to the documented changes to society and geopolitcs over the last two decades, most of which can be in some way attributed to social media's warped influence. You correctly mention nuclear weapons being an existential threat yet you fail to acknowledge that deteriorating social and political norms make their use significantly more likely than at any point prior in the last 30 years. A lone individual was able to convince an armed and politically potent minority of the United States that lizard people are real and a threat to children worldwide. These people are now driving a race to the bottom that ends in control of the largest nuclear arsenal on the planet. What's tedious is individuals who have access to enough information to damn well know better playing the part of the frog in the pot of soon-to-be-boiling water.

NovaDudely 3y ago

I have been working on an article about this, broad summary is that things like AI - they can do a damn lot of damage before people figure out how impotent they really are. It isn't the technology I fear, it is how people build grand expectations on the technology and then start throwing people under the bus of the "great god of progress". Those that are first to implement new technology are usually the most reckless, uncaring to the possible blow back provided it benefits them. Those that hold back to analyse the risks many never make it to the market because they are crushed by the move fast people. This is why we have such rampant con's a disinformation nowadays, those that push their ideas and concepts out fastest can generally get a good head start on those that are trying to be more moral or ethical.