TechTakes

2232 readers

242 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

dgerard@awful.systems

221

"Anti-ai arguments literally support eugenics" (infosec.pub)

submitted 1 week ago by irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/techtakes@awful.systems

83 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Reminds me of this:

I think atproto is a good protocol, but god bluesky-the-company is dogshit.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] ook@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 1 week ago (13 children)

I'm so confused reading all this.

[–] irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 1 week ago (12 children)

Their argument is something like this:

People might say something like "ai is incapable of thinking" or "ai is stupid", but if you replace the word "ai" with something like "women", you're saying something unacceptable.

[–] shawn1122@sh.itjust.works 24 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

So they're attributing personhood to AI.

Before it has come anywhere close to meaningfully mimicking conciousness.

Are they stupid?

[–] BlueMonday1984@awful.systems 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

AI believers believe that stringing random words together is equal to consciousness, they absolutely are stupid.

[–] shawn1122@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 week ago

Perhaps because it reflects their level of consciousness.

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments (9 replies)