4 ms·

You didn't understand my point. I said in the future (not now) the world might trend to having wars similar to those of playing video games. And I said this mig

by aogaili 7mo ago

You didn't understand my point. I said in the future (not now) the world might trend to having wars similar to those of playing video games. And I said this might be better because we just give politicians another medium for conflict resolution. But you downvoted the idea, so you either don't like it or didn't understand. I assumed you understood it, but it seems you didn't

watwut 7mo ago
It is as plausible as countries handling wars by boxing match.
- aogaili 7mo ago
  But that is what is happening now. Drones vs anti-drones, what happens when robots comes online? robots vs robots..and people/AI at the command centre managing war from a UI that looks like star craft.
gambiting 7mo ago
>>We (as humans) are getting more strict about losing people's life. We don't allow genocide, we don't allow colonization and enslavement, at least the majority of nations agree that this is not acceptable. I downvoted because I don't find this quoted sentence true, realistic or even remotely plausible. I will repeat for the 4th time now that I don't understand why you seem to think that downvoting you means supporting genocide - you seem to be very fixated on that idea. >>But you downvoted the idea I did not - I thought I made it clear in my last comment.
- aogaili 7mo ago
  [flagged]
  - kelnos 7mo ago
    Holy false dichotomy, batman! Regardless of whether or not anyone does or doesn't understand your point or position, you're being very obtuse about this. There are many other possible scenarios that could play out, and disagreeing with the idea that "wars will turn into video games" doesn't mean someone is in favor of genocide. That is how children argue; please hold yourself to a higher standard. Also, if you put obviously incorrect information in the same comment (which you absolutely did), you should expect to be downvoted.
    - aogaili 7mo ago
      This is all ad hominem and name calling, you provided zero counter-points.

by aogaili 7mo ago

watwut 7mo ago

It is as plausible as countries handling wars by boxing match.

aogaili 7mo ago
But that is what is happening now. Drones vs anti-drones, what happens when robots comes online? robots vs robots..and people/AI at the command centre managing war from a UI that looks like star craft.

gambiting 7mo ago

>>We (as humans) are getting more strict about losing people's life. We don't allow genocide, we don't allow colonization and enslavement, at least the majority of nations agree that this is not acceptable. I downvoted because I don't find this quoted sentence true, realistic or even remotely plausible. I will repeat for the 4th time now that I don't understand why you seem to think that downvoting you means supporting genocide - you seem to be very fixated on that idea. >>But you downvoted the idea I did not - I thought I made it clear in my last comment.

aogaili 7mo ago
[flagged]
- kelnos 7mo ago
  Holy false dichotomy, batman! Regardless of whether or not anyone does or doesn't understand your point or position, you're being very obtuse about this. There are many other possible scenarios that could play out, and disagreeing with the idea that "wars will turn into video games" doesn't mean someone is in favor of genocide. That is how children argue; please hold yourself to a higher standard. Also, if you put obviously incorrect information in the same comment (which you absolutely did), you should expect to be downvoted.
  - aogaili 7mo ago
    This is all ad hominem and name calling, you provided zero counter-points.