Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Magnifica Humanitas

vatican.va

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 1001 posts

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#281

Post by komali2 »

kspacewalk2 wrote: post #272
WhyNotHugo wrote: post #127

This quote is from 1903. Times haven't changed that much: > Not a handful of rich people, but all the working people must enjoy the fruits of their common labour. Machines and other improvements must serve to ease the work of all and not to enable a few to grow rich at the expense of millions and tens of millions of people.

The truly interesting question, and the crux of the matter, also hasn't changed much since 1903: How?

There's been plenty of examples of workers seizing the means of production and establishing sustained non-capitalist organization (State or otherwise). We have any number of strategies to choose from: The PRC, Soviet Union, Syndicalized Spain (my favorite, seems the least likely to lead to police state), Vietnam, Cuba. The question thus isn't "how," but more specifically a couple other questions: "How do we prevent capitalist forces from liberalizing our movement (PRC, Soviet Union)," "How do we prevent fascists from killing us all (Syndicalized Spain)," "How do we prevent becoming a state-capitalist police state that halts the revolution (PRC, Soviet Union)"?

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#282

Post by PantaloonFlames »

pj_mukh wrote: post #278
sethbannon wrote: post #22

The overarching message is that builders should deeply consider the impact of what they're building on civilization. "Technology is never neutral, because it takes on the characteristics of those who devise, finance, regulate and use it." Therefore builders "bear a particular ethical and spiritual responsibility" because "every design choice reflects a vision of humanity." The questions shouldn't just be 'can we buil…

Under this logic, would the Pope have built a Hammer? a Knife? I am hoping the Pope has a cleaner view of AI quietly automating the drudgery in the back offices and not just robot dogs with machine guns. And with that view, should we build it?

It's too simplistic to imagine the tension is between robot patrol dogs vs automating drudgery. If automating drudgery suddenly puts 30% of people out of work, it has huge broad negative impact on people who are currently alive and working in the current system. Innovate, but do it with awareness.

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#283

Post by nemomarx »

pj_mukh wrote: post #273

I would love for the Pope to answer this question: If a technology existed that reduced the cost of producing a critical thing (think food, housing, medical care) down to near zero, however, it made the humans currently building the thing redundant, should we build it? Would it be okay to use the hyper-optimization power of Capitalism to build such a technology faster? Before someone yells at me about this not being…

If the technology is used to serve humanity by providing food or housing, it seems like his stance would be approving. But if it was used to increase profits and people still starved that would be bad, right?

"AI must be used for the good of humanity" isn't even an anti ai position really.

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#284

Post by GuB-42 »

> A more moral AI is not enough if that morality is determined by a few

Particularly ironic considering the history of the Church.

I mean, it is not wrong, but that's essentially the business of essentially every church, religion, cult,... whatever you call your spiritual organization.

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#285

Post by pj_mukh »

PantaloonFlames wrote: post #282
pj_mukh wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Under this logic, would the Pope have built a Hammer? a Knife? I am hoping the Pope has a cleaner view of AI quietly automating the drudgery in the back offices and not just robot dogs with machine guns. And with that view, should we build it?

It's too simplistic to imagine the tension is between robot patrol dogs vs automating drudgery. If automating drudgery suddenly puts 30% of people out of work, it has huge broad negative impact on people who are currently alive and working in the current system. Innovate, but do it with awareness.

Than an even better question for the pope is:

If a technology existed that reduced the cost of producing a critical thing (think food, housing, medical care) down to near zero, however, it made the humans currently building the thing redundant, should we build it? Would it be okay to use the hyper-optimization power of Capitalism to build such a technology faster?

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#286

Post by sunshine-o »

I read as long as my attention span would allow because this is a very long text.

I am curious, what is the view of different religions on conversing with something that is not human like a chatbot?

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#287

Post by mercacona »

NUMBERED PARAGRAPHS, YESSSS! Seriously, once page numbers have become optional, electronic editions of books (monographs, essays, and academic texts) need to number the paragraphs so we can keep references working. I’m fed up with referencing the entire text or specific chapters.

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#288

Post by ctoth »

sethbannon wrote: post #22

The overarching message is that builders should deeply consider the impact of what they're building on civilization. "Technology is never neutral, because it takes on the characteristics of those who devise, finance, regulate and use it." Therefore builders "bear a particular ethical and spiritual responsibility" because "every design choice reflects a vision of humanity." The questions shouldn't just be 'can we buil…

The strange part is how moral responsibility somehow always lands on the builders... the people with the least leverage... while the funders get to ask the ethical questions. Weird!

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#289

Post by stavros »

Lerc wrote: post #178

I have found that, for many of the statements about what AI should do, I would actally be happier if the letters "AI" were replaced with "companies"

I don't think anyone actually has an issue with AI. I think people are finally fed up with late-stage capitalism and lashing out.

Re: Magnifica Humanitas

#290

Post by achierius »

komali2 wrote: post #281
kspacewalk2 wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The truly interesting question, and the crux of the matter, also hasn't changed much since 1903: How?

There's been plenty of examples of workers seizing the means of production and establishing sustained non-capitalist organization (State or otherwise). We have any number of strategies to choose from: The PRC, Soviet Union, Syndicalized Spain (my favorite, seems the least likely to lead to police state), Vietnam, Cuba. The question thus isn't "how," but more specifically a couple other questions: "How do we prevent c…

While this is certainly the more interesting question, the unfortunate reality is that the ideological complex of capital (even if weakening, and no longer effectively reproducing itself) is still strong enough that most in the West can't even imagine a better world (other than "less bad capitalism"), much less think about how to get there. Consequently messages like the above are of great value in moving more people towards a point where questions like yours become relevant.
Post reply on HN