4 ms·

How can technology be the problem?—it’s people, obviously There’s one on every thread in this place.

infecto 1y ago
Did you have anything worth adding or are you here to simply be a low quality troll? I understand you have a religious level of belief in your opinion that it clouds your ability to communicate with others but perhaps ask thoughtful questions before lowering the quality. I am not absolving technology but as someone who has never been impacted by the problems it amazes me that so many people get caught up like this and I simply wonder if it’s always there but the internet and increased communication makes it easier.
- keybored 1y ago
  > Did you have anything worth adding or are you here to simply be a low quality troll? I understand you have a religious level of belief in your opinion that it clouds your ability to communicate with others but perhaps ask thoughtful questions before lowering the quality. And you?
  - infecto 1y ago
    So typical of the low quality post to try to turn it right back around. No sorry, you are the one opening up with hyperbolic comments that add no value. I am genuinely curious if this has always been an issue throughout all of humanity. And I only reply to you in the hope that you actually add constructive thought but clearly not.
    - keybored 1y ago
      > Have a large part of the population always been susceptible to insane conspiracies and psychosis or is this recent phenomenon? I read this more like a question biased towards “yes” because there is nothing supporting it. > The feels less of a ChatGPT problem and something more is at play. Even if the begged-for answer is true... both things can be true. And on the specific topic of LLMs you can find ways to solve that particular problem which reduces the overall problem. Because if the root problem is “stupid people” or “naive people” or whatever else: you get less accidents if you make the territory less booby trapped. But these rhetorical topic changers—if they are indulged instead of being interrupted—tend not to approach any fruitful discussion. And that’s despite whatever intentions that the original poster had. Because the side topic then either turns towards arguing for or against the premise. Or else the premise is accepted and all we get are aw-shucks grandiose statements about how human nature is so-and-so and that etc. etc. some subset of the population will just get bamboozled anyway and technology is irrelevant and fin conversation. Yes despite the intentions of the OP who might have indeed wanted to “broaden the conversation”. Because (1) this particular topic can’t be analyzed when things are generalized so aggressively, and (2) that’s just how this misanthropic community acts on these topics. In aggregate.

Did you have anything worth adding or are you here to simply be a low quality troll? I understand you have a religious level of belief in your opinion that it clouds your ability to communicate with others but perhaps ask thoughtful questions before lowering the quality. I am not absolving technology but as someone who has never been impacted by the problems it amazes me that so many people get caught up like this and I simply wonder if it’s always there but the internet and increased communication makes it easier.

keybored 1y ago
> Did you have anything worth adding or are you here to simply be a low quality troll? I understand you have a religious level of belief in your opinion that it clouds your ability to communicate with others but perhaps ask thoughtful questions before lowering the quality. And you?
- infecto 1y ago
  So typical of the low quality post to try to turn it right back around. No sorry, you are the one opening up with hyperbolic comments that add no value. I am genuinely curious if this has always been an issue throughout all of humanity. And I only reply to you in the hope that you actually add constructive thought but clearly not.
  - keybored 1y ago
    > Have a large part of the population always been susceptible to insane conspiracies and psychosis or is this recent phenomenon? I read this more like a question biased towards “yes” because there is nothing supporting it. > The feels less of a ChatGPT problem and something more is at play. Even if the begged-for answer is true... both things can be true. And on the specific topic of LLMs you can find ways to solve that particular problem which reduces the overall problem. Because if the root problem is “stupid people” or “naive people” or whatever else: you get less accidents if you make the territory less booby trapped. But these rhetorical topic changers—if they are indulged instead of being interrupted—tend not to approach any fruitful discussion. And that’s despite whatever intentions that the original poster had. Because the side topic then either turns towards arguing for or against the premise. Or else the premise is accepted and all we get are aw-shucks grandiose statements about how human nature is so-and-so and that etc. etc. some subset of the population will just get bamboozled anyway and technology is irrelevant and fin conversation. Yes despite the intentions of the OP who might have indeed wanted to “broaden the conversation”. Because (1) this particular topic can’t be analyzed when things are generalized so aggressively, and (2) that’s just how this misanthropic community acts on these topics. In aggregate.