At the end of the day, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Though politically incorrect - I'm optimistic about climate change and I feel we're going in the right direction.

We're having breakthroughs in nuclear fusion, and small nuclear reactors.

We're decarbonizing with cleaner sources of electricity and using electricity instead of fossil fuels.

The cost of carbon capture technology is decreasing with time.

AI is becoming more advanced to the point that it's not just able to design art - it's able to aid development. It's possible AI itself could soon accelerate engineering for all of the above.

I think we will have a future where we will have to at least briefly rely on genetic engineering to restore ecosystems. Plants naturally take carbon from the air, and use it to grow.

If a plant is engineered for example that could grow in a barren ecological wasteland - it could capture carbon and clean the air, while the roots could also help break down toxins in the earth.

We're discovering bacteria that can decompose some plastics. Maybe a genetic boost could let this bacteria destroy ocean plastic.

AI will eventually be strong enough to analyze genomes and figure out how to bow to patch up weaknesses.

Economies are a complex subject. In my opinion we're in a pre-recession period.

During the pandemic - companies jacked up the pricing of everything. For a while their profits grew.

Eventually things can become so expensive, people don't want to buy it anymore. Now all of a sudden these companies have extra product they can't sell it, and they have to drop the price to get rid of it.

This leads to lower profits and shrinkage/receding. This is starting to happen now with technology. AMD's Ryzen 7000 and Nvidia's RTX 40 were very expensive at launch.

As a result both products had very few sales and this was a punch in the gut to both companies and they had to slash their prices. Now AMD is cutting manufacturing as they know it won't be profitable.

Both companies will be forced to make cheaper products which people will actually buy.

Ultimately the recession is a good thing. The prices went crazy high for things from computer parts to cars to houses.

When the recession happens the prices will fall which means all of these will become more affordable.

This benefits people like you and me while it will hurt the people who tried to exploit by jacking up the prices.

Ultimately it's a big correction.

The way I see it - the rich and big corporations have a lot of power and influence. I grew up with gangster rap and independent West Coast rap. Today record labels are big corporations that dictate everything about music.

Technology dictated modern music. Albums could not be longer than a vinyl record, cassette tape, or CD. Ideally you'd have at least a few songs on one.

There's a reason why we have 3 hour concerts, but not 3 hour songs.

Find art is often something that serves the rich and wealthy.

It's also possible AI could make it easier for regular humans to express ourselves musically or artistically.

You might have a beautiful idea in your mind, but you don't know how to draw it. AI might help bring that vision into art you can share with the world.

Of course many people will disagree with my, but they have a right to. Everyone gets to form their own opinions, these are just mine.

Nope. Just the purest example of my point that we assert our will violently on people who're anti-social.

Who gets to define anti-social? Hopefully someone kind and pragmatic who also has empathy.

Agree %100. We don't need AI with original thoughts and (gasp) feelings. That's a recipe for disaster. AI should serve people not replace them .

[removed]

You act as if the price on these things will always be this high. It's like saying cars will never replace horses because the cost of buying a car is the equivalent to 30 horses. Right now it isn't practical to replace people with them but do you really think it will be like that forever?

The benefits are also that the robot works for no benefits, doesn't take sick days, doesn't complain, it doesn't take workers comp if an accident happens, it isn't late, and doesn't require legally required HR training on the clock. The machines basically work 24/7, they do need to recharge but when you get multiple robots you now have workers that will walk over and charge themselves and work in shifts nonstop reliably.

They rightly pan Horizon Worlds as it's presented now as disturbingly reminiscent of the empty-but-not-insignificant hype around Second Life. And of course the utopian attitude of tech bros is a meme ("Making a difference; making the world a better place... through minimal message oriented transport layers.").

But Facebook really did make the world better... at first. And if they wanted to they could go significantly farther and make the world better, by just doing what they do now, but cut back the design in which anything productive that someone wants to do on there is through a clutter of garbage that's worse than the worst targeted ads from faceless corporations -- that which reinforces addictive behavior. Instead, look at Facebook's special-purpose competitors -- take Meetup and Google Groups for irl socializing and networking, something that could be done for free on Facebook, but that many are avoiding because of that ickiness. Company feeds on Twittertagram are duplicated on Facebook, so there's no reason why I should be able to view people's Twitter posts without logging in while Instagram and Facebook are locked. If the original idealism was that more access + more communication + more socialization (irl and virtual) generally grows your userbase while also improving society, then just in terms of how they've shifted the design of their core product, they've been working against that.

Wasn't this the plot of an avengers movie?

It's more about the "aim" of innovation, i.e. what social configuration and lifestyle are we trying to enable with technology. If you ask the billionaire class they might be interested in a future where a lot of people (other than them) work a ton to advance their visions of the future. And if you ask everyone else they might think we should automate as much as possible to enable creativity and human freedom

Look at you thinking outside of the constructed theory… I’m proud of you!

I doubt maintaining the robot arm would be expensive. The issue with automation right now is the entry cost doesn't justify replacing a worker but as wages for workers keeps going up, as do the cost of benefits and the costs from them taking days off and bathroom breaks, the robot becomes cheaper. The price of the robot will also lower over time. I also really doubt DHL just bought the robot arms with it just being a money sink, they wouldn't do it if they didn't think it would save them money.

Maybe. A sombrero might work best depending on the angle of the drone's camera.

... This reads like something that is AI generated.

Anything to actually do the right thing for the environment, as long as quarterly profits keep increasing.

I am pretty happy with robot neato vacuum and robot narwhal mop. 10/10 will continue to buy robot vacuums and mops.

I believe the Illuminati are already working on this one.

Your comment made me want to kill myself even more than I already did. And no, I'm not joking or being edgy.

[removed]

How about really big hats?

Yes you are right, those things help a lot, but they help you do something. Those machines dont do it for you

Sure, and the black plague resulted in improvement in labor mobility. Win! :)

These things can be true, but you’re still skipping over a fairly large amount of human suffering that happens during the transition. Remember that a lot of the jobs provided by Industrial Revolution factory work were often less healthy than even subsistence farming. Livings conditions as well, in the growing cities required by the centralized factories using the new large expensive equipment.

And of course, this was not directly the fault of the steam engine. In many ways, the loss of jobs in the farming sector was the result of agricultural policy, and not technology. The surplus rural population, then got fed into the industrial workforce as desperate needy workers, which was as much to blame as “progress”.

The idea that in a generation or two will still have plenty of jobs, does not mean we should ignore the fact that you’re going to have a bunch of people in one or two generations, who can’t earn a living because we don’t have a society that has a proper safety, net or proper retraining systems.

The ideal response would be, to fix those systems. Not to try to stop the inevitable progress of technology. But it’s also not good to get lost in the long term picture and forget about the short term social cost.

EDITED one million typos

Gtfo. Have we not seen enough of crypto and nft bs crash and burn?

Really? The COVID vaccines were developed in a year and distributed for free to the public. More generally, cancer deaths are plummeting and it’s not because people are living healthier lives, it’s because new cancer treatments are available to the general public.

FF 20yrs News story : Was there a message in the movie Wall-E?

Who do you think gives the drone a pic of the person needing killing? Obviously there is a human in the loop.

I in fact, took classes on the history of technology for humanities requirements for my degree in robotics and AI and both industrial revolutions were covered heavily. The takeaway was that automation almost always results in more jobs, and technology doesn't really have any agency itself. These are concerns from the early industrial revolution that somehow have not gone away despite the opposite being proven repeatedly through all three industrial revolutions. For hundreds of years economists have disagreed with the idea that technological unemployment is a significant issue. It even has a name: The Luddite fallacy. This has come around again in the 21st century because of confusion about the limits of what correlation engines can do. They're really good at throwing darts but can't tell you any of the rules of the game.