- Joined
- Jan 10, 2011
- Messages
- 1,378 (0.28/day)
- Location
- [Formerly] Khartoum, Sudan.
System Name | 192.168.1.1~192.168.1.100 |
---|---|
Processor | AMD Ryzen5 5600G. |
Motherboard | Gigabyte B550m DS3H. |
Cooling | AMD Wraith Stealth. |
Memory | 16GB Crucial DDR4. |
Video Card(s) | Gigabyte GTX 1080 OC (Underclocked, underpowered). |
Storage | Samsung 980 NVME 500GB && Assortment of SSDs. |
Display(s) | ViewSonic VA2406-MH 75Hz |
Case | Bitfenix Nova Midi |
Audio Device(s) | On-Board. |
Power Supply | SeaSonic CORE GM-650. |
Mouse | Logitech G300s |
Keyboard | Kingston HyperX Alloy FPS. |
VR HMD | A pair of OP spectacles. |
Software | Ubuntu 24.04 LTS. |
Benchmark Scores | Me no know English. What bench mean? Bench like one sit on? |
All technologies came to be as a response to some incentive, which is nearly always to personal (or immediate group's) benefit. Early on it was for pure survival, then we started waging wars, then we figured out trade and markets. Philanthropy rarely shows in this equation. Just look at our evolution from simple artisanal secrets taught only to heirs to trade and military secrets to patents and intellectual property and whatnot.I'm quite familiar with the term, but there is a reason that AI has grown into a trillion-dollar business as fast as it did. I've never really believed that technology could pose a major threat to the workforce, until very recently - and in fact, for the most part, up until you would call Microsoft Office something revolutionary (and it was), technology only served to mankind's direct benefit.
Given the incentive model, how an invention benefits mankind isn't measured by how or why it came to be (else you'd be hard pressed to rationalize things like GPS or even iron working), rather its net effect on people's lives. Academia has a lot of arguments for the latter.
Don't discount humanity. We've been migrating away from labour-intensive technologies for centuries, yet here we are, still breeding like rabbits, living longer, growing healthier, and surprisngly still maintaining more or less the same unemployment rates.
As for the sentient AI, at this point, it's still a fantasy. I wager it would be easier to design and grow meat slaves than have a machine that mimics the complixity of the human brain (which we are far from figuring out). More Brave New World, less Terminator. We've got the consumerism part checked out already...
Quite the opposite, actually.In my opinion, the ideal use for AI is replacing judges in court rooms.
AI would have access to the ENTIRE catalog of case law and precedents.
No bias, no bribes, no intimidation, no political activism.
AI inherits the biases of its learning dataset, and the past rarely is considered "fair" or "just" by today's standards.
Semi-related comic.