Well I think that AI can be very beneficial to society in the health and medical field.
lost and found
21

Change is in principle not a problem. The devil is in the detail — what sort of change?

… it’s not the fault of the television if one decides to dumb themselves down by watching only stupid stuff.

True. But those who run the networks seek to dumb down all the viewers. It is a key strategy for effective publicity spots — even amidst seemingly more informative programs. And the mix of content only exists so that all types of people are targeted.

I do not think that AI is advanced at all in terms of something hard-to-understand. It is little more than automated statistical analyses with enhancing feedback loops mixed into its own processes. Nothing humans invent can be smarter than we humans ourselves — only more efficient at specific tasks. Being quick and thorough have no direct relationship with being intelligent and wise. And the technical jargon changes nothing of this. All professions invent jargon to obfuscate what they are about and imbue themselves with an air of exclusivity.

So I value your positively non-derpy response. Sometimes you need to be outside these things to see them for what they are — it’s a sort wood-for-trees situation.

On the specific topic of technology, I would argue that all technology IS bad, provided a narrow definition of ‘bad’ as damaging to the environment. As regards early technology — stone axes, spears, even iron smelting — these had negligible impact, in part due to the very small populations in which they emerged. But looking at modern technology, I defy you to find one that does not do environmental harm, given that metallurgy, plastics, concrete, fertilizer and pretty much any other industrial process or substance pollutes the world, along with all the energy consumed in such processes.

There are of course a whole lot of defenses arguing pros versus cons in that department, but what strikes me is our cultural denial of this rather obvious basic truth. At best, technology is a trade-off of damage for perceived benefit. The obvious explanation for our blindness in this area is that nobody anywhere from corporate CEOs down to the casual handyman wants to admit they are complicit in all the resulting environmental damage. Certain forms of self-esteem have the potential to blind.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.