The biggest hurdle is that we don’t actually know what intelligence really is at all yet, computationally. Most of the history of science has been repeatedly learning “but things were actually more complicated than originally expected,” so making claims that we’re soon to be able to replicate something that we don’t actually properly understand yet may be a bit premature. The desire to replicate human intelligence by a machine has been around since at least the 1200’s brazen heads, and yet for everything we’ve discovered since we’re still just beating our heads against a wall trying to sleuth out what it really is that makes us ‘think.’

And we’re still waiting for a definite announcement that yes, humanity has finally produced room-temperature, ambient-pressure superconductors.

Exciting news for sure, but as usual it’s not quite there yet.

How exactly do you get “less” of a certain type of person without tearing them down?

I think the focus should be on not having so many white privileged people in the real world

Why should you focus on tearing others down, especially when you’re simply looking at them as a statistic rather than individuals?

https://archive.is/wYuvL

Archive.is is useful for getting past them.

Well, it’s true there are people who would call me unreasonable.

First link seems fine. Here’s the second one.

If it can be done, people will do it. If you think the FBI are unique in this, you’re very naive. We need to fundamentally rethink how our technology is designed if we ever hope to have any privacy again.

Well they don’t care about problems until they affect their own families, so there’s that at least.

They super fucking salty that computers are not ushering in their utopian self-contained artificial society as they expected.

I’m all for this.

Again I’d say they’re not as openly unethical because they pretend they’re not preying on people.

So bad actors are certainly not kept at bay

My biggest problem is that it actually makes things easier for bad actors when you set them in stone, because there’s more things that they know they can count on to happen a certain way.

Frankly, with open access to the entire world, there are a very large number of completely real conspiracies which you are connected too, through intelligence agencies, mafias and terrorist organizations. Failure to recognize this fact is a big problem with the way the Internet has been designed.

Bluntly, even before AI there was an ever present threat that anything you encountered online was written by someone with ulterior motives. Maybe AI is just making it easier for people to digest because they don’t want to distrust people. The solution that I see is to always be aware of what other reasons any particular media could be serving, and to maintain a clear picture in your own mind of what’s important to you, so no matter who wrote something for what reason, you won’t be personally misled.

Look up the term “mindshare” if you want to have some fun. They aren’t even shy about the idea that they’re literally attempting to buy and sell parts of your mind. Advertising is the most openly unethical legitimate industry that exists. I’d say social media is worse, but it’s intertwined and they aren’t honest about what they do.

It’s incredible how easy it is to check so many articles by simply spending 2 minutes finding a primary source. Really changed my perspective on what was happening when I first tried it.

“Everything is rosy in Xinjiang”

That’s not the extent of what they do. They absolutely push harmful ideas that people can act upon as well.

Unfortunately you can’t even trust your hardware itself. Modern chips have enormous numbers of undocumented processes, and iirc some newer ones are even getting dedicated sections that aren’t directly accessible to the user (someone correct me, or elaborate if you know more).

Any move in the right direction is good, even if it doesn’t prove to be enough on it’s own.