In theory, could you then just register as an AI company and pirate anything?
K3zi4
joined 2 years ago
Trump asks SpaceX to bring "abandoned" Starliner crew home, blames Biden administration for inaction
Wait, does he think that Elon has to fly the ship up there to pick them up...?
Yes, please. The story, cast, and setting of 6 are so damn good.
I absolutely love that we built a wind farm off the coast of his golf club in Aberdeen and he's been raging about it ever since.
Pro-life crowd really trying to murder as many children as they can. That's crazy. Good luck America.
This isn't technically the trolly problem, sorry to be pedantic. But the trolly problem is not in the deaths either track would cause, but in the decision to actively pull the lever and make yourself responsible for the outcome. Inaction means allowing what will be to be.
Eg, if the train is heading towards three people, and you can pull the lever to send it towards one, congratulations, you saved two lives. BUT you just made yourself responsible for the murder of one. Whereas before, you would not have been responsible for the death of the three.
Doesn't matter how dressed up the problem is, involvement means making yourself responsible for murder.
It could be used for amazing things, but it's currently in that phase where it's a rapid frenzy to make anything, regardless of moral and ethical implications, just to cash in before it inevitably gets monopolised.
Let's be real, If any AI was going to turn into skynet, it would be an AI trained on twitter data.
I love the missing contextual steps in going from 1 person tied to a train track, to that person seemingly holding off a rapidly approaching train with a minigun while 1 million people attempt to escape.
All these different, more extreme variations of the trolly problem seem to be missing the point of it. It's not about the deaths, it's about making the decision to be responsible for those deaths.
To rearrange the premise. If the person was a doctor, and three patients (tied to track A, current path) needed organs to live, and only one person, (Track B) had those organs, should the doctor make the conscious decision to sacrifice the person on track B to save the others?
The people on track A will die without the organs, that is already happening, and the doctor has no involvement in those deaths. However, by getting involved and consciously sacrificing the person on track B, the doctor has now committed murder and taken responsibility for the situation.
I would be surprised at the absolute stupidity of that, voting for the absolute corpo party in some bizarre protest, but you guys already voted him in for a first term so nothing is really surprising when it comes to the US anymore.
view more: next ›
If I were to guess, I'd say they're trying to sweeten up to the reform crowd and address their bigoted rage to try and take the wind out of Russian Backed PM Farage next election.
The problem, of course, is that all them seething boomers will always just be told what the next thing they're angry about is. So it's pointless. The global rise of the hateful fascist avalanche has already begun, and it's impossible to reason with.