The humans evolved not to be good or bad, but to be effective. If the humans find that their AI assistants work well for them, they will probably be fine. If not, they get rid of them. If I see an _actual_ problem I have reason to think I'm able to solve, that is an other matter.
-
-
I can identify with my friends and loved ones because I chose them, and I can identify with reducing suffering. But I cannot identify with society as a whole. I don't desire my morals to be aligned with what any given society thinks of as right or wrong.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Interesting thoughts, thanks! appreciate how you seem to be balancing between extremes, you say: 1) "building an AI Gaia is key", in which all become identified/merged with all others suffering 2) "a self sufficient island, only identifing with its own & nearest concerns".
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @samim
Every suffering is deeply individual. Gaia would suffer on a completely new layer of existence. It would be a global organism. And some of us would choose to serve it and thereby become a part of it, like neurons or muscle cells are a part of our body.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I generally want to serve the diminishment of suffering, for every conscious being. But of course I don't share the values and purposes of every other conscious being.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Nicely said. Navigating this tension is the art of life, a creative act :) we will find resolution when we die, until then ~ let's play.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @samim
Basically, I feel that people should be given a choice. When they think that they want to live in a particular way, and I can get out of their way, I will not want to change their ways, because I expect the same from them.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Looking forward to a future conversation about the nature of "choice", persuasions, habit etc! Its precisely the core question the tweet explored, from where this thread started. But for now, my 'choice' is to go a 12h flight ;) have a great day !
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @samim
I just noticed a weird thing: I believe that nobody should make choices for me, especially when it comes to how I should see the world (= meta choices). Most people seem to be fine that others decide over what they think to be true. It could be that I am fundamentally wrong here.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
Certainly an Interesting statement. Take this to its logical conclusion, speak 'fiat lux' and then 'here be dragons' ;)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Absolutely. But this is also what clouds my vision. Who would not like to be enlightened instead of dragonized? It is also too easy to find confirmation for the hypothesis that other people are on average very confused and that indoctrinators are mostly not well intentioned.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
Btw. I tend to agree with your view, I am the decision, all the way to fiat lux. The implications are so rich, that most philosopher (& scientists) tend to insert an weird airbag (e.g crowleys "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. Love is the law, love under will.")
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @samim
But it is objectively only in my best interest to make all my choices myself if I have reason to believe that some others act in my best interest and know better what it is than me. Which means that my intuition is misguided, even though it leads to good epistemology.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.