Most active commenters
  • justonenote(6)

←back to thread

Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance

(www.washingtonpost.com)
617 points jbegley | 13 comments | 04 Feb 25 20:28 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 ◴[04 Feb 25 23:18 UTC] No.42940660[source]▶
I want to be upset over this in an exasperated expression of oddly naive "why can't we all get along?" frame of mind. I want to, because I know how I would like the world to look like, but as a species we, including myself, continually fail to disappoint when it comes nearly guaranteed self-destruction.

I want to get upset over it, but I sadly recognize the reality of the why this is not surprising to anyone. We actually have competitors in that space, who will do that and more. We already have seen some of the more horrifying developments in that area.. and, when you think about it, those are the things that were allowed to be shown publicly. All the fun stuff is happening behind closed doors away from social media.

replies(9): >>42940696 #>>42941054 #>>42941060 #>>42941115 #>>42941183 #>>42941453 #>>42941855 #>>42941871 #>>42941899 #
dgfitz ◴[04 Feb 25 23:22 UTC] No.42940696[source]▶
Could you imagine how the entire world would look if they took truth serum for an entire year, how different the world might be?

Lies run the planet, and it stinks.

replies(9): >>42940743 #>>42940790 #>>42941628 #>>42941773 #>>42941779 #>>42941833 #>>42942022 #>>42942031 #>>42942171 #
10u152[dead post] ◴[04 Feb 25 23:28 UTC] No.42940790[source]▶
[flagged]
1. ziddoap ◴[04 Feb 25 23:32 UTC] No.42940849[source]▶
Your point could be made, probably even stronger than it is currently, by omitting the insult at the start.
replies(1): >>42940974 #
2. ziddoap ◴[04 Feb 25 23:42 UTC] No.42940988[source]▶
>than a chatgpt style

Literally just remove the first 4 words and keep the rest of the comment the same, and it's a better comment. No idea what chatgpt has to do with it.

replies(1): >>42941047 #
3. justonenote ◴[04 Feb 25 23:48 UTC] No.42941047{3}[source]▶
That would be removing information and strictly worse that including it.

Communication is about communicating information, sometimes a terse short and aggressive style is the most effective way. It activates neurons in a way a paragraph of polite argumentation doesn't.

replies(1): >>42941182 #
4. lioeters ◴[04 Feb 25 23:52 UTC] No.42941088[source]▶
Similarly your point would have communicated better without the unnecessary and adolescent final sentence.
replies(1): >>42941128 #
5. cortesoft ◴[04 Feb 25 23:54 UTC] No.42941114[source]▶
“More effective” at what? No one is ever going to be convinced by an argument that begins with an insult. So what do you mean by it will be more effective?
replies(1): >>42941211 #
6. justonenote ◴[04 Feb 25 23:55 UTC] No.42941128{3}[source]▶
It was for effect.

Maybe you'd prefer if we were all maximally polite drones but that's not how humans are, going back to GPs point, and I don't think it's a state than anyone truly wants either.

7. justonenote ◴[04 Feb 25 23:56 UTC] No.42941146{3}[source]▶
No comment.
8. Hello71 ◴[04 Feb 25 23:59 UTC] No.42941182{4}[source]▶
the contention of your respondents and downvoters is that regardless of your intention, the extra information actually communicated is "i'm an asshole".
replies(1): >>42941278 #
9. justonenote ◴[05 Feb 25 00:01 UTC] No.42941211{3}[source]▶
Do you honestly think an insult never brought about a change in a person? You never think a carefully landed and accurate insult made someone reconsider their position?

Weird, because in my experience, that has happened to every single person I know and myself. Whether it's at the start or end of a comment is not really the point.

replies(2): >>42941281 #>>42941450 #
10. justonenote ◴[05 Feb 25 00:07 UTC] No.42941278{5}[source]▶
Fine, that's still extra information.

More accurately in the context of the comment, its "Im gonna be an asshole to you because I think you don't have the life experience I do", which is at least, some kind of signal.

I wasn't the original responder btw.

11. dgfitz ◴[05 Feb 25 00:07 UTC] No.42941281{4}[source]▶
Welp, in this specific instance, your insults are a microcosm of the election results.

Stinks, huh?

replies(1): >>42941344 #
12. justonenote ◴[05 Feb 25 00:12 UTC] No.42941344{5}[source]▶
Things are very black and white these days, no room for shades.
13. mrbungie ◴[05 Feb 25 00:21 UTC] No.42941450{4}[source]▶
It may do depending in context, but that's not the point and in fact is widely recognized as a ad hominem argument and fallacious by definition.

Most emotionally mature people would stop arguing after something like that.