For many of us, the idea is also the problem. Stealing the collected works of humanity in order to build a machine meant for delegating the thinking and feeling parts of the human experience is deeply antisocial, and an attack on our dignity as people
Which is why it was supposed to be an open technology with no profits as its a culmination of humanity. Nobody should own it or make a profit from its creation.
I don’t know. I think Facebook took a turn when it was engineered to boost engagement. Otherwise, it’s just a forum for friends to make posts. What’s wrong with that, in theory?
It doesn’t really have to be. The problem is that the profits that comes from that machine are not spread among the working people - that would be the social way to implement it.
That’s only one of many harms it does to the human experience. Look at a company like Facebook. Do you think socializing that industry and sharing the profits with the users would mitigate the harms it does to our lives? I sure don’t.
It in fact would, because there would be no incentive to keep it like it is - it would never have been made so bad if it was a democratic decision.
Facebook and Co. is bad today because there’s a conflict of interest between users and shareholders, and Zuckerberg chose the shareholders cause they line his pockets. This conflict would not exist if it was democratic.
For many of us, the idea is also the problem. Stealing the collected works of humanity in order to build a machine meant for delegating the thinking and feeling parts of the human experience is deeply antisocial, and an attack on our dignity as people
Which is why it was supposed to be an open technology with no profits as its a culmination of humanity. Nobody should own it or make a profit from its creation.
This would be a problem even if the technology were completely free and open. LLMs poison peoples minds and make them boring, helpless and stupid.
If Facebook were a nonprofit, it would still be terrible for people.
I don’t know. I think Facebook took a turn when it was engineered to boost engagement. Otherwise, it’s just a forum for friends to make posts. What’s wrong with that, in theory?
Even if that happened it would still be a terrible technology. The damage to the environment isn’t worth it.
It doesn’t really have to be. The problem is that the profits that comes from that machine are not spread among the working people - that would be the social way to implement it.
That’s only one of many harms it does to the human experience. Look at a company like Facebook. Do you think socializing that industry and sharing the profits with the users would mitigate the harms it does to our lives? I sure don’t.
It in fact would, because there would be no incentive to keep it like it is - it would never have been made so bad if it was a democratic decision.
Facebook and Co. is bad today because there’s a conflict of interest between users and shareholders, and Zuckerberg chose the shareholders cause they line his pockets. This conflict would not exist if it was democratic.