81–90 of 357 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> taking away their ability to participate in society first, then selling it back to the richest of them is an ingenious business approach. That's not what is happening here. These tools (Neuralink and others) enable people who are disabled to participate more in society.
But it won’t help get them a job because DEI is bad.
I very violently recoil from any of Musk's ventures these days. Im sure there are some very smart and talented people working at Neuralink. They should go work for someone else as their boss has shown himself to be a revolting person and the kind of leader who seeks to actively harm people who inconvenience him. This kind of behavior is not befitting of a company that will need to cultivate an incredible amount of tr…
What is the problem with Musk? I know his many shenanigans, but what about his helmanship causes you to violently recoil?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> we all know helping disabled is not the end-game objective of neuralink. Can you tell us more what you surmise we all think is the end-game objective?
Someone who has genuine concern for helping people doesn't cut medical programs in fly-by-night operations to leave people with medical devices in their body and whatnot. Empathy and caring about suffering can be ruled out. Generally speaking, the demo is always about finding the green ball on top of a red cube, or the person who went missing in a land slide, but what sells it is detecting and aiming at the dissident…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it won’t help get them a job because DEI is bad.
Nobody prevents them from getting a job, as long as they pass the interview like everyone else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same disabled people whose hard earned rights are on the chopping block right now in the name of anti wokeness? I’ll say, taking away their ability to participate in society first, then selling it back to the richest of them is an ingenious business approach.
> taking away their ability to participate in society first, then selling it back to the richest of them is an ingenious business approach. That's not what is happening here. These tools (Neuralink and others) enable people who are disabled to participate more in society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The tech itself is far-fetched; that hackers exploit vulnerabilities in every system is not, rather it is so common you can measure attempts in Herz.
You have again ignored the trade-off in your word-play.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is the problem with Musk? I know his many shenanigans, but what about his helmanship causes you to violently recoil?
Overt nazi salutes is one, but another is the intentional tinkering-with and partial dismantling of the US Government's system to dispense appropriated funds, and act that is blatantly illegal.
I very violently recoil from any of Musk's ventures these days. Im sure there are some very smart and talented people working at Neuralink. They should go work for someone else as their boss has shown himself to be a revolting person and the kind of leader who seeks to actively harm people who inconvenience him. This kind of behavior is not befitting of a company that will need to cultivate an incredible amount of tr…
What is the problem with Musk? I know his many shenanigans, but what about his helmanship causes you to violently recoil?
One of the great examples of this is the infamous "Pedo guy" incident in which he showed himself as very unempathetic and petty the moment people dismissed him as he attempted to hastily insert himself into a tragic moment.
He's also regularly sued people exercising their free speech to comment on or criticise his financial interests, knowingly attempting to drown influential people he doesnt like in legal fees and frivolous lawsuits.
In the past he has participated in doxing governmental employees who might cause him financial damages, often encouraging his followers to harass beuraucrats and lawyers who are just doing their legal jobs.
There are plenty of examples of Elon regularly engaging in bullying of others who may not have access to the resources he does, its not just limited to these few examples.
In my eyes, any measure of success or wealth will never excuse how a person conducts themselves in public. And I think Elon no longer thinks that the rules apply to him as so many are willing to overlook his behavior due to worshiping his money and influence. Elon's nazi salute is the perfect example of this.
So my original statement still holds. Neuralink has a very large mountain to climb when it comes to consumer trust. Products in the Healthcare industry can massively impact people's lives, especially when they dont work as intended. Any company that participates in this space is morally and ethically required to be empathetic to the lives that they impact. And this level of empathy is not something that I see coming from the man behind neuralink which I think should disqualify it as a company with the potential to impact a lot of people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Being concerned about animal testing seems pretty silly coming from people who likely eat pigs, sheep and other intelligent animals every day, who likely lived in just as bad conditions if not worse their whole lives leading up to them becoming food. I also eat meat, it just seems a bit ironic to me.
You are ignoring the benefit side of a benefit-harm morality analysis. Eating an animal at least ostensibly has positive value for the people doing so. However, there are plenty of forms of "animal testing" that confer zero positive value. For instance, testing the wrong compound or inserting the wrong implant confers zero benefit. Having improper controls, "testing" nonsensical theories, repeating stale results poor…
It is what comes before the eating that we should think about. We are breeding conscious beings (cattle, pigs, chickens) in harrowing conditions, with second order effects on the environment and plant and animal diversity (by clearing space for feed).
Should we stop eating animals? I don't know.
Should we stop testing on animals? If it meant that we cannot develop certain classes of therapies, then probably not.
Should we level up our compassion and care for animals and the environment even if it means humans have less luxury as long as it doesn't hold back increased life and health span? Probably.