The AI crash is impossible - Change my View

[Alex_R]

I just want to make billions with my AI Startup, i dont care about others.

[Alex_R]

Private Equity just need something fancy to dump their cash, they don't care if it actually works or not.

[Lyubov]

The Diary of a CEO guy is such a mark. I don’t know how else to explain this podcaster type guy. Joe Rogan is the same. They sort of experience a higher form of brainrot and get hypnotized by all the powerful people who go on their podcast. So they start believing the hype. Rogan did the same with Trump. This dope at the start starts citing the tech bros as credible. 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

11 minutes ago, Lyubov said:

The Diary of a CEO guy is such a mark. I don’t know how else to explain this podcaster type guy. Joe Rogan is the same. They sort of experience a higher form of brainrot and get hypnotized by all the powerful people who go on their podcast. So they start believing the hype. Rogan did the same with Trump. This dope at the start starts citing the tech bros as credible. 

Both the DOACEO guy and Rogan don't challenge and push back enough imo.

[Lyubov]

5 hours ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Both the DOACEO guy and Rogan don't challenge and push back enough imo.

The thing is they see success as virtue so it’s like if you can hang with them and you’re high on the success hierarchy they treat your word the same as people treated the word of the church 200 years ago. Their guests are considered beyond reproach because of this but it’s usually washed and called neutrality because they can’t have strong opinions. Makes them soft as shit. They’ll host the occasional intellectual but when you zoom out and look at podcast you can see it marches to the beat of the society drum, which at the moment is very corrupt and misguided.  

Edited 9 hours ago by Lyubov

[integral]

6 hours ago, Lyubov said:

The Diary of a CEO

I just saw a video of him pushing the Canadian version of Trump on his platform.

They think creating a free open space to talk and platforming all of these snakes is this open minded concept.

Edited 8 hours ago by integral

[LordFall]

2 minutes ago, integral said:

I just saw a video of him pushing the Canadian version of Trump on his platform.

They think creating a free open space to talk and platforming all of these snakes is this open minded concept.

Poilievre might not be the sharpest tool in the shed but I do believe he means well and he should be encouraged to share his views publicly. I don't know what the solution is to people lacking critical thinking but silencing big portions of the popular opinion is not a good solution. 

@Cireeric I only watched 2 mins of it but she seems to make some good points. Deploying AI in an ethical and responsible way for humanity is very important. 

[integral]

30 minutes ago, LordFall said:

I do believe he means well

This is why we cant have nice things good sir.

Quote

he should be encouraged to share his views publicly

Of course! Same with hitler, trump and everyone, FREEDOOOOOOOOOM

Edited 8 hours ago by integral

[integral]

If your donors are oil companies you have no right to speak. your just a walking corrupting advertisement. 

Edited 7 hours ago by integral

[LordFall]

That 'oil donor' logic is a slippery slope. By that standard, a huge percentage of Canadian public figures—regardless of their actual message—would be disqualified from the conversation before they even open their mouths.

I’d rather hear the perspective and judge it on its own merits than have a platform act as a moral gatekeeper. It feels like you’re advocating for a 'purity test' for speech, but that usually just leads to echo chambers, not higher consciousness. How do we grow as a society if we only engage with people who have zero ties to the industries that actually run the country?

[integral]

45 minutes ago, LordFall said:

That 'oil donor' logic is a slippery slope. By that standard, a huge percentage of Canadian public figures—regardless of their actual message—would be disqualified from the conversation before they even open their mouths.

I don't need to know that he has donor ties to disqualify him that's not my main epistemology. I'm just pointing it out.

The man has no integrity and that should be obvious every time he opens his mouth.

yes if your taking money from big oil you cannot be trusted in office to make any decision.

Corruption 101.

Yes the message is a lie. 

Quote

I’d rather hear the perspective and judge it on its own merits than have a platform act as a moral gatekeeper. It feels like you’re advocating for a 'purity test' for speech, but that usually just leads to echo chambers, not higher consciousness.

Nope not at all. We are talking about incentives. If someone pays me to do a job ill do the job. Thats what a 100 million dollar donation is. You are paid now to do the job of big oil, big pharma, big wtv.

Quote

 

Goldman Sachs' PAC and individual contributors donated $994,795 to Obama's 2008 campaign, making it his second-highest contributor CNN. In total, Obama received more than $2.5 million from employees at Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and Citigroup alone The Motley Fool. Wall Street gave Obama $16 million for his 2008 run Bloomberg.

And then what happened? Obama packed his economic team with Wall Street insiders — Larry Summers was paid over $5.2 million by hedge fund D.E. Shaw, Timothy Geithner came from the New York Fed under Bob Rubin, and multiple Goldman Sachs people got appointed to key positions Common Dreams. Former Goldman Sachs lobbyist Mark Patterson became Chief of Staff to the Treasury Secretary The New American.

 

 

Quote

How do we grow as a society if we only engage with people who have zero ties to the industries that actually run the country?

The success rate is zero. We don't need to be scammed again to learn from the past mistakes. These people that are taking money are all untrustworthy by historical fact. There is no need to test it again. There's no need to test 100 more times, we figured it out already.

Yes you could only trust someone who has zero ties to those Industries. That is correct.

The question is loaded making it look like that the only option is we have to engage with these people. No we don't have to play their game at all. There is no game were we win by consciously thinking about what those Liars have to say, its not going to get us closer to solving any real world problems.

It makes sense to observe them to figure out if they have integrity and so on. But past that point they're just lying like you're just engaging with some worldview that they don't even believe. 

Edited 2 hours ago by integral

[integral]

Bernie Sanders isn't playing the corruption game and he's not taking money from these criminals.

And as a result he has no traction. So yeah if you want to win you got to be corrupt. And so none of them can be trusted, you're basically choosing between the least of two evils and that's about it.