I've seen waaaaay too much people behave with regards to technology as they do with religion. And then they claim to be enlightened.Looks like a case of the Golden Calf to me, Tank.
I've seen waaaaay too much people behave with regards to technology as they do with religion. And then they claim to be enlightened.
They still dream of electric sheep.Wonder what the AI equivalents of atheists might look like.
Translation: you have no idea whatsoever what you're talking about, what such technology might look like, but your entire perception of it is dictated by scifi and you want to propose political systems based around that vision. But then, you can rest easy knowing that your perception of AI is just as realistic as your perception of anarchism as a viable political system: not at all.
This discussion is not even political science for dummies or administration explained to toddlers: you want utopia and you heard a cool scifi concept that some snake oil peddlers tell you will surely cause utopia or apocalypse, so you go full speed on it... Could be AI, could be anarchism, could be whatever buzzword and you'd say the same thing.
... for fuck's... you do realize that you are arguing for system you describe as being so superior to everything while being based on giving absolute power to something you admit not understanding in any way, hoping to make shit up as you go?That's what it takes to have an entrepreneurial spirit, Rufus. Steve Jobs hardly knew a damn thing about computers before he met Wozniak, but he still ran a successful company that made them. Do you know why? Because he was the ultimate snake oil peddler. He knew how to take an idea ordinary people would love, describe it, and get experts to create it for him. Donald Trump became president of the United States even though his knowledge of our history was so rudimentary that didn't even know what the flag of the United States actually means.
Ugh, don't compare Jobs with Trump. Heck, I wouldn't call Trump an entrepeneur myself. Dude's a soft boiled Mafia wannabe who conned his way into most of everything he did.
... for fuck's... you do realize that you are arguing for system you describe as being so superior to everything while being based on giving absolute power to something you admit not understanding in any way, hoping to make shit up as you go?
I think I need to be blunt here: that's why you will never be an engineer, and I really hope noone's life will ever be entrusted to your caring hands. ESPECIALLY when it comes to politics. Trump is a fucking bad example to emulate, as are all the fuckers who had no idea what they were doing but rode on convincing millions they opened the way to perfection. We had a few of those assholes here, these "entrepreneurs" of politics who explained to the crowds how everything would go just fine. Our continent burned and we got millions of dead because of people doing what you propose doing in politics. So, now, go back to bed, get yourself a Mountain Dew and stop talking about politics.
Really. Just stop.
So you have complete reading comprehension failure.Oh, so what you're saying is that technocracy is good and that experts should rule instead of con-men and charlatans? Good, let's start immediately.
I have a secret for you, lad: administration and politics do not require the same skills and knowledge base as engineering and scientific research. Stop putting engineers and researchers on a pedestal as magical priests who solve all problems with equations like in bad science fiction. Hell, you probably have no idea what state administration entails in real life, no more than you do about scientific research.You want to whine about the inexpertise and imprecision of these people, Rufus, but I don't see any scientists and engineers stepping up to the plate to actually campaign for public office and take their place. That's because politics isn't a job for smart people. It's a job for stupid people who bark like dogs at the masses, and smart people continually allow themselves to be ruled by that sort of person without much complaint.
I have a secret for you, lad: administration and politics do not require the same skills and knowledge base as engineering and scientific research. Stop putting engineers and researchers on a pedestal as magical priests who solve all problems with equations like in bad science fiction. Hell, you probably have no idea what state administration entails in real life, no more than you do about scientific research.
Wow, so full of certainties propagated by the media and your pop culture. Impressive, you make for an excellent model of sheep, easily-led.I do know that state administration is filled with excess bodies. Morons invent red tape to stream across everything, and then they inflate their departments with people—a great managerial glut—to navigate the maze that they, themselves, created. I work in public transportation, and even though our service has remained mostly the same for 50 years, in the same time period, our number of managers has increased by ten times. A whole order of magnitude. They don't do any more than the people they replaced. Each one of them does one-tenth the work for the same pay and same hours. That's why much of our time at work these days is spent idle. If we are idle at work for such long periods, would we not be better off if we simply weren't at work at all? However, I digress.
And now we go for the oversimplification and the manicheism. I hope you do realize that by switching a few names here and there, we get right to the people you hate? There's no thinking, not even an attempt at understanding the complexity of a situation. No, everything is simple, you see: there are good people and bad people. We need to put the good people in power and deal with the bad people who happen to have massive influence and who are inherently bad for the good folks so that we can secure the future of our nat...It appears to me that a lot of humanity's future hinges on our acceptance that climate change and resource depletion are inevitable facts of life, and if we do not act to avert catastrophe, millions will die. In other words, scientists and engineers—while hardly being omniscient—have laid out our future for us and described, essentially, a policy to follow. Whether or not people actually follow it depends on a number of factors, but the biggest stumbling block for preventing climate change is the simple fact that so much of our GDP relies on petroleum products, petroleum energy, and petroleum-based transportation. The scientists scream "Stop using fossil fuels!" However, the policy-makers have giants like Enron twisting their ear saying "Keep using fossil fuels, I need my retirement bonus." Who do they trust? Who are the politicians supposed to believe? Scientists or businessmen? Well, the businessmen pay the bills, so they have veto power. Therefore, society keeps chugging along off a cliff as usual. That's neoliberalism in a nutshell.
There are infinite possible ways in which those things can be arranged, so I find it unlikely. The laws of physics are impossible to complete; at best, we can hope that the things we don't know aren't important.But, say we do. Say we figure out unified field theory and unite gravity with all the other forces in a coherent model of the universe. Let's say we discover every last fundamental particle and conceivable unit of matter that can possibly exist according to the laws of our universe. What then? Where do we go from there? What is left to discover? I'm not saying there would be nothing, I'm just saying that we might hit a wall along the way, one that will take a lot of effort and resources to climb over.
It's not. This is a common misunderstanding. Those ridiculously high estimates are actually estimates of how much power it would take to simulate a human brain, which is a completely different thing from how much processing power the brain itself has. As anyone who's ever run a console emulator can tell you, it takes way more processing power to emulate a device at the hardware level with software than that device itself actually has.It's not inconceivable that something like that could happen. The power of the human brain is estimated at 1 ExaFLOP (a very fuzzy estimate; the structure of living brains is so fundamentally different from digital computers, there's no real comparison that can be made between the two).
This is why people think you're an an-cap.I do know that state administration is filled with excess bodies. Morons invent red tape to stream across everything, and then they inflate their departments with people
Somewhat skimmed the article.This one has got some interesting formulae. @Horton, what do you make of this?
Well that's enough to become a Youtube expert, which is basically the modern renaissance man.So not specialising in at least some areas and instead trying to become a polymath will likely just lead to a very shallow knowledge in a lot of areas.
A RATIONAL YouTube expert!Well that's enough to become a Youtube expert, which is basically the modern renaissance man.
oh lelThe thing with a modern polymath is that they'd have a huge emphasis on the math, able to quickly learn basically any subject of physics through mastery of the shared foundation. Less an expert in everything and more a journeyman in everything who knows how to quickly become an expert in anything. In terms of actual physics equations, there's not yet too much to be practically learnable in a human lifetime. The main barrier to a modern polymath is that nobody's organized the data in the ways necessary to make learning it all practical. There isn't a Big Book Of Physics Equations, they're scattered between thousands of papers and dozens of courses, and the main reason for this state of affairs is that the curricula can't keep up and we mostly need specialists to progress the practical aspects of specific areas.
Heh heh, that's what people think when they watch Hollywood. Pro-tip, I haven't used anything more complex than additions and multiplications to get a bloody PhD in physics.oh lel
If you think learning a subject is "memorising equations", then you're not as smart as you think you are.
Yep. That's how they're portrayed in movies and series.So, equations are the modern day equivalents of spells, eh?
/S
Yep. That's how they're portrayed in movies and series.
Excluding infinite seriesand series.
Heh heh, that's what people think when they watch Hollywood. Pro-tip, I haven't used anything more complex than additions and multiplications to get a bloody PhD in physics.
Most people not only ignore science, they ignore what science is and they ignore ignoring what science is. Which is why they barge in, full of certainty.