4 ms·
You're missing the point of the car section. The point isn't that cars were a dangerous technology. The point is that just as the car replaced the horse, progr
by mmmore 2y ago
You're missing the point of the car section. The point isn't that cars were a dangerous technology.
The point is that just as the car replaced the horse, programs on computers are set to replace the human mind. Right now, we see only the beginnings of the trend; inventions which look interesting but limited. But eventually, and perhaps sooner than many believe, the replacement of human cognition will radically transform the world in unprecedented ways.
- fidotron 2y agoAnd you missed my point > The point is that just as the car replaced the horse, programs on computers are set to replace the human mind My point is this is not inherently a bad thing. At some point either the human mind is overtaken by another species or AI. We must learn to accept this inevitability.
- mmmore 2y agoRight now we are not so much choosing to replace ourselves with machines as stumbling into it through hubris and ignorance. If the argument is we should accept our demise to make way for something better, we should be more explicit and deliberate about that. Most people are not imagining that future. And there's not convincing reasons to believe our current path will lead to something "better". I think you're right that I misread your first two paragraphs though. Sorry.
- rurp 2y agoThat sounds pretty bad to me. "At some point" would probably be millions of years in the future, but you're ready to force the issue this decade. If you asked everyone in a developed country what they think about completely upending life as they know it and replacing it with something unknown; that might be better, or might be horrifically worse, we'll just have to see what happens; most people would be strongly opposed to that proposition.