← Back to context

Comment by monegator

3 days ago

tough most people either don't get it or are lay people that do not want to become the kind of people who can think. I go with the second one

Russ Hanneman's thigh implants are a key example. Appearances are all to some people. Actual growth is meaningless to them.

The problem with AI, is that they waste the time of dedicated, thinking humans which care to improve themselves. If I write a three paragraph email on a technical topic, and some yahoo responds with AI, I'm now responding to gibberish.

The other side may not have read, may not understand, and is just interacting to save time. Now my generous nature, which is to help others and interact positively, is being wasted to reply to someone who seems to have put thought and care into a response, but instead was just copying and pasting what something else output.

We have issues with crackers on the net. We have social media. We have political interference. Now we have humans pretending to interact, rendering online interactions even more silly and harmful.

If this trend continues, we'll move back to live interaction just to reduce this time waste.

If the motivation structure is there I don’t see an inherent reason for people to refuse cultivating themselves. Going with the gym analogy lay people did not need gyms when physical work was the norm, cultivation was readily accomplished.

If anything there is a competing motivational structure in which people are incentivized not to think but to consume, react, emote etc. Information processing skills of the individual being deliberately eroded/hijacked/bypassed is not a AI thing. The most obvious example is ads. Thinkers are simply not good for business.

  • Gym is a great analogy here since only a small fraction of population goes to gyms. Most people just came fat after work was no longer physical and mobility was achieved with cars.