> Are you saying that anybody can do something new only if they _can_ handle all the externalities that they cannot possibly have control over? No, not at all.

> Are you saying that anybody can do something new only if they _can_ handle all the externalities that they cannot possibly have control over? No, not at all. But to focus majority of the time focusing on greatness and downplaying the consequences will skew the public perception. If you're skewing perception then you, as a society, aren't fully understanding the implications of what's happening (eg social media in 2010 vs social media in 2020s, mental health, people quiting, etc). > If a politician says "go get a job, don't leach off the government and tax payers" and is so out of context, may be the political system and electing such a politician is a problem, and you ought to improve the society than asking Microsoft to think about the jobless... Yup, there's definitely a issue with current political systems. The system is likely going to resist change and I'm not foolish enough to think it will change much any time soon given the current trajectory. Obvious this varies country to country. > I do agree with you and hate the trope that is "we make the world a better place" or using the word - sustainable and green color to things that cannot possibly be either. That's all I was highlighting. It's all grandiose promises of sunshine and rainbows as one may naively assume if you take any AI "thought leader" at their literal word. I'm not going to quote any of them, but the clip this post links to has a number of direct quotes from them about what great planet scale problems AI will solve. I wasn't proposing any solution, but trying to highlight the naivety of assuming AI will usher in an era of greatness for _all_. It would be great if you could get all the benefits and humanity could live on this planet, and maybe others, for millions of years in prosperity and greatness, but the systemic underlying issues will continue to persist even into this next era.