Idk I think they kind of do, tackling climate change is a good idea and at this point I’m ready to lie if it will make ppl do something
Good ideas do not need lots of lies in order to gain public acceptance (2008)
91–100 of 228 posts
Re: Good ideas do not need lots of lies in order to gain public acceptance (2008)
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me the danger of AI is that it enables the surveillance state through facial recognition and the instantaneous aggregation of all my data. For "national security" reasons, I may be detained and denied of my rights if Palantir hallucinates. Who do I sue if Palantir decides I am an illegal?
The thing is a government never needed technology to be authoritarian. The government today already has all the tools to ruin your life. It had them in 1940. It had them in 1840 and it had them in the year 40 as well. And that tool is known as the monopoly on violence. It can be wielded in many ways good and bad.
> It had them in 1940. It had them in 1840
Yea, and they were way more successful at it in 1940 than 1840. Are you accounting for all the times they tried to enforce their authority but ultimately failed?
> And that tool is known as the monopoly on violence.
No one has a monopoly on violence. What they really have is called "qualified immunity."
In this particular instance, though, their violence is particularly enabled by cheap technology and computing power.
Re: Good ideas do not need lots of lies in order to gain public acceptance (2008)
#93The flip side is that good ideas with honest framing often lose to bad ideas with better marketing. Being right isn't enough if you can't communicate it and most people don't have the patience to evaluate the honest version.
I'd add (not saying you said otherwise) that marketing bad ideas well isn't quite the same as good communication. I guess a funny thing is that the more naive or blind or optimistic one is, the more one might wiggle their way out of some definitions of “liar.” If they're good at lying to themselves, maybe it doesn’t count as lying to others.
Re: Good ideas do not need lots of lies in order to gain public acceptance (2008)
#94Idk I think they kind of do, tackling climate change is a good idea and at this point I’m ready to lie if it will make ppl do something
I think addressing climate change is more of a policy issue. I think most people are onboard with addressing climate change (modulo some cranks who are open to idea that the earth is flat and oil company ceos ig). It just doesn't translate into policy due to corruption.
Re: Good ideas do not need lots of lies in order to gain public acceptance (2008)
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and companies that granted them outcompeted companies that did not What are you basing this claim on?
That of the top 10 companies in the S&P 500 [1], all but Broadcom and Berkshire Hathaway give generous stock options, and also that of the top 10 in 2000 [2], only one (Microsoft), maybe 2 (Cisco) did. If you look at change in index composition, or even total earnings by company, you'll see a very steady and dramatic replacement of companies that did not spread the wealth through stock options & RSUs with companies t…
Conflating stock options and RSUs?
Re: Good ideas do not need lots of lies in order to gain public acceptance (2008)
#96[dead]
Re: Good ideas do not need lots of lies in order to gain public acceptance (2008)
#97[dead]
Re: Good ideas do not need lots of lies in order to gain public acceptance (2008)
#98[dead]
Re: Good ideas do not need lots of lies in order to gain public acceptance (2008)
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ot worse because it didn't hallucinate, and they are coming for you, as a free thinking "radical". They can tell from a long deleted blog post you made in 2005 about green energy.
Why bother with all that though? Just ask them to do their job for the party. If they don't, or you suspect they don't align with the party, you just execute them. Don't need tech for this. The tech is just for some people to get rich, not to really enable any new evil that can't already be achieved today with pen and paper and bullet (as modeled extensively in the last century). Put it this way, if Hitler had grok,…
> if Hitler had grok, would it really get any worse for the Jew
Not grok specifically, but yes.
The holocaust in the Netherlands was remarkably bad in large part because the Dutch administration was so well-organized and had kept a registry of Jews.
Bad guys are going to use this technology to evil ends if given the chance.
BTW, there's a chilling alternate history novel called NSA by German author Andreas Eschbach about precisely that kind of idea. The premise is that computer science progressed a lot more quickly. The book opens with German data scientists in the 1930s combining census and financial transaction data (i.e., food purchases using electronic cash) to identify households that are hiding Jews and other "undesirables" .
Re: Good ideas do not need lots of lies in order to gain public acceptance (2008)
#100The flip side is that good ideas with honest framing often lose to bad ideas with better marketing. Being right isn't enough if you can't communicate it and most people don't have the patience to evaluate the honest version.
Is "better marketing" a euphemism for "more willing to misrepresent the other side, turn a practical issue into an emotional one, and generally trot out every logical fallacy they can think of"? Because that's what I see constantly on social media in response to progressive ideas the rest of the world has largely accepted but apparently just can't possibly work in the United States...
[dead]