4 ms·
Yeah, that's also fine. However I am personally willing to side with the group which's arguments for the cause are environmental and societal impact over the on
by xydone 3mo ago
Yeah, that's also fine. However I am personally willing to side with the group which's arguments for the cause are environmental and societal impact over the one which's rebuttal to that is the fact we were wrong once 40 years ago. That's just me though.
- adrians1 3mo agoWe weren't wrong just once, 40 years ago. That's just one example, but the Luddites and doomers were wrong every time something new was invented. Check this out: https://x.com/PessimistsArc https://x.com/PessimistsArc
- estearum 3mo agoThis train of thought is hilariously rife with selection bias. There is an infinitely long list of technologies that "Luddites and doomers" tried to block and were thankfully successful in doing so. CFCs and ozone. Leaded gasoline. Thalidomide. Offensive bioweapons. I'm not claiming Luddites and doomers are always or usually right (they're often wrong), but your claim they were wrong every time is just total epistemological failure on your part.
- xydone 3mo agoLuddites, the group of people which famously were concerned about societal impact of a piece of technology? Right.