Comments by "justgivemethetruth" (@justgivemethetruth) on "Sam Harris"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The problem is that every time this discussion comes up for black people ... and I am white so take this as a guess from my point of view. black people get schooled on how they should be behave and what they should expect, and the implication is that only when they accept and bend to the white man's law - then maybe they will be treated right.
There is a lot of good stuff to think about in this podcast. I just heard it today on a hike, but it is too bad this is not a dialog. For instance about the time Michael Brown was killed it came out that the country doesn't keep track of stuff like this. I don't know what data Harris was talking about, but there is a lot wrong from making such conclusions without a really deep dive into that data with skepticism. It is the 21st century ... why do we thing the government either doesn't track this stuff or doesn't release the information to the public.
Everyone is always talking about us losing our democracy, but we've never had a democracy and cannot have a democracy without and informed public, and to have an informed public and the honest keeping of certain metrics and measurements about the society, economy, justice system, etc. There are so many hundreds of ways rich people cheat regular people, and the black minority and African Americans are on the bottom of that - and though we talk about it endlessly nothing happens and in fact in many ways its worse.
Some democrat ... I think it was either Yang or Booker made the points in the democratic debates about how for whites their wealth grows by compounding, but the crimes and oppression compounds over time as well. All the quibbling about the facts does is to make people realize again they are trying to ignore the problem.
1
-
Ben Shapiro - Donald Trump was the first President to send weapons to Ukraine, and that is when Ukraine started to be a real threat to Russia.
I could be wrong, but I've read a lot about the Ukraine thing, and my feeling is that Russia accepted losing Ukraine from its orbit, but they really cared more about Crimea, and I think Crimea was really Russian, with a lot of Russian value and investment. Ukraine President Yanukovych was working to have Ukraine neutral as a go-between from the West to Russia, but the US would not accept that, and couped Ukraine. That set off alerts in Russia that were unacceptable leading to the war. The idea that Russia did not attack Ukraine because they were scared of Trump seems laughable to me. Now since the EU/US cheated on their promises and treaties with Russia, it will be very hard for Russia to make a deal with the West about Ukraine because they know the US will not honor it. Our Ukraine policy from both administrations has been a disaster except for the victory that the US has kept Russia out of the EU economy, which was our main goal.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
42:25 - When I think about Hawkins' and Harris' ideas on AI, and risk, and doomsday I have to side more with Hawkins. I think Harris' ideas on super-intelligence and AI "getting loose" are absurd science fiction, and fear-mongering to get attention and to help get funding for ... who really knows what.
It is like the "missile gap" in the old Cold War, more of a marketing idea or manipulation by fear, by spelling out some kind of absurd catastrophe, and relying on our science fiction movie experience rather than any well thought out ideas.
For example, the first problem is that no one has yet still explained what intelligence it, and what it its relationship to consciousness, and whatever consciousness is.
One simple way of looking at it would be like Freud's conceptions of the mind, id, ego and super-ego. Id in particular, the driver, the motivator. I don't see human beings being able to deconstruct ourselves to the level necessary to understand or measure or maybe even perceive the elements of intelligence.
And then Hawkins seems to think you can unhook the intelligence function as a kind of module, remove it, recreate it and interface it to your TV, or car, or house, or military force? I don't buy that either. That is an attempt to market to customers who he wants to sell his vision and inventions to. I don't know that anything he has produced so far as been effective or useful.
I look at it this way, our consciousness was the product of evolution going back to the simple chemical processes in the first proto-cells, what contributes towards survival works, stays around and evolves and develops ... all the way up to our consciousnesses we have today. I don't see how he thinks you can unhook that from a supervisor/manager function with some kind of goals.
Human goals have to do with feelings, and feelings are hardly intelligent. They can be, but they can also be twisted. How does an AI entity conceive of itself if it reaches consciousness. It has nothing in common with humans. It is not born into a connection with other humans, the product of birth, society, and seeking to reproduce and to control in some way its reproduction and the destiny of its species.
For example, the end of Hawkins' book he is all about human survival. What would make an AI excited and interested in surviving? Does there need to be some kind of weird elusively hidden pleasure button that the AI consciousness does not understand but blindly allows to control its actions and thoughts?
But Hawkins must be right about how to proceed to study intelligence, because our only example of it is ourselves, but then we have to acknowledge the evolutionary thread that goes back millions of years. How do you do that, and what happens if you try to avoid or deny that?
1
-
1
-
1