you can already see people going very excited/paranoid, even with such minimum evidence to do so.I think you're reaching a bit with this neolib take tbh
Liberals will deny sentience to AIs just as they do to unborn humans?View attachment 11917
This is a very fair point I think.
The next-gen neolibs will push to consider self-proclaimed sentience as valid, even if the code will say completely otherwise.
Ironically the next generation of the pro-life lobby.
current pro-life movement overlaps quite a lot with tinfoil hat communities, they are rather prone for becoming luddites, if anything.Liberals will deny sentience to AIs just as they do to unborn humans?
ayfkmcurrent pro-life movement overlaps quite a lot with tinfoil hat communities, they are rather prone for becoming luddites, if anything.
current neo-liberals will overly attribute sentience to every single image generator.
roles are to swap.
Don't mind @mixed_biscuits, he's the forum's token Catholic fundamentalist.current pro-life movement overlaps quite a lot with tinfoil hat communities, they are rather prone for becoming luddites, if anything.
current neo-liberals will overly attribute sentience to every single image generator.
roles are to swap.
I won't be happy until Wektor repents his sinesDon't mind @mixed_biscuits, he's the forum's token Catholic fundamentalist.
I am aware, we have spoken in person.Don't mind @mixed_biscuits, he's the forum's token Catholic fundamentalist.
now that is a mr tea tier oneI won't be happy until Wektor repents his sines
I might easily be wrong - seems like a lot of neolib techies these days are more concerned with the ethics and censoring the models and it might as well be libertarians who will proclaim giving the code some autonomy, even if potentially harmful.Even by dissensus fringe standards that is quite a take
The "tech-libertarian" (i.e. tech-fascist) position would be to declare an IQ level above which inanimate objects can legally be considered human, and below which humans can legally be considered inanimate objects.I might easily be wrong - seems like a lot of neolib techies these days are more concerned with the ethics and censoring the models and it might as well be libertarians who will proclaim giving the code some autonomy, even if potentially harmful.
I am aware, we have spoken in person
That doesn't mean he's wrong, does it?The only thing I mentioned was that I prefer fruit and nut dairy milk to whole nut and Wektor ran a correlational analysis to derive everything else
Classic smear campaign: assume a pro-life stance is irrationally motivated rather than reflecting the ruling argument in moral philosophy.That doesn't mean he's wrong, does it?