Dude, You Broke the Future [video]

Post by bsaul » Sat, Dec 30, 2017, 6:58 PM UTC

LV-426 wrote: post #58

bsaul wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a common misconception : Capitalism isn’t as ambitious as communism in that matter. It doesn’t aim at making the world a just or better place, just more economicaly efficient one. Communism is not only an economical system, but it also aims at solving the unfairness that it attributes to capitalism, and then invents all kinds of counter measure ( one of them being the revolution, and « temporary » dictactorshi…

> Capitalism [...] doesn’t aim at making the world a just or better place I didn't say it did. I pointed out that if you're going to insist that mass murder under a few decades of communist regimes = real communism, then mass murder (and genocide and slavery) under centuries of capitalist regimes = real capitalism. > Communism [...] invents all kinds of counter measure ( one of them being the revolution, and « tempor…

Post by tqdm » Sat, Dec 30, 2017, 7:06 PM UTC

icc97 wrote: post #62

tqdm wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only similarity between cooperations and AGI is that they are superhuman optimization processes that yield considerable risk and that are tricky to control. The difference is that in case of cooperations there still is a human element: vulnerability/fallibility, social reputation/integration, slowness/interpretability, empathy. The policies for mitigating the respective risks are very different.

He connects the corporation to the description of the Chinese Room. A corporation is a very big room full of people with human level intelligence under an artificial union acting as one. Perhaps you can find other areas where that breaks down, but as far as reasonable guesses as to what will happen with AI in the near furture, this is the best I've heard so far.

Post by LV-426 » Sat, Dec 30, 2017, 8:12 PM UTC

bsaul wrote: post #101

LV-426 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Capitalism [...] doesn’t aim at making the world a just or better place I didn't say it did. I pointed out that if you're going to insist that mass murder under a few decades of communist regimes = real communism, then mass murder (and genocide and slavery) under centuries of capitalist regimes = real capitalism. > Communism [...] invents all kinds of counter measure ( one of them being the revolution, and « tempor…

Well, no you can’t make that equivalent reasoning , that’s my point. People blaming communism makes a lot more sense because it does deal with what the political regime should be (once again, a dictatorship ). Who should be in charge, for what political goals, with which privilege, as well as provides all the intermediate steps on how to accomplish that goal. It is not of the same nature.

Post by fallingfrog » Sat, Dec 30, 2017, 8:49 PM UTC

perl4ever wrote: post #97

fallingfrog wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no such thing as pure capitalism either, because private property cannot exist without all the elaborate state machinery that libertarians love to hate: a court system, contract law, a police force, an army, and the taxes to support it. All this stuff exists to create the illusion of such a thing as pure private property. Neither pure communism or pure capitalism are things that could exist in the real world…

Rejecting "a court system, contract law, a police force, an army" sounds like an anarchist's point of view, and while libertarian anarchists (or anarcho-capitalists) exist, equating them with libertarians in general approaches the limit of how ignorant I can believe a non-troll to be.

Post by bsaul » Sun, Dec 31, 2017, 12:23 AM UTC

LV-426 wrote: post #105

bsaul wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, no you can’t make that equivalent reasoning , that’s my point. People blaming communism makes a lot more sense because it does deal with what the political regime should be (once again, a dictatorship ). Who should be in charge, for what political goals, with which privilege, as well as provides all the intermediate steps on how to accomplish that goal. It is not of the same nature.

> Well, no you can’t make that equivalent reasoning And yet I seem to have done it. > People blaming communism makes a lot more sense You're entitled to your opinion. > because it does deal with what the political regime should be (once again, a dictatorship). Since you persist in arguing about "dictatorship" instead of communism, I don't see any point in continuing this. Edit: instant downvoter I think you missed on…