Also, you have to imagine that policy interventions are likely to have negative implications, and these implications might not be obvious. This is already a problem. It's even worse if someone is coming up with policy interventions for scenarios and technologies which don't even exist.
What if robots became sentient? What if animals could talk? (parrots don't count). Should they have rights? This is admittedly an extreme example, but hypotheticals get into realms which are divorced from meaningful discourse.
One involves VR which is far more advanced than what exists. But, it's pointless to hypothesize about (as if it matters to policy), because it doesn't exist.
If it was a real thing, I might have something to say, however, I don't really like to engage with hypotheticals. I don't really like abstract discussions with little to no real world value.
Artificial "intelligence" #AI
Bluesky is the opposite. I think the character limit there is around 300 (and on Mastodon, URLs don't contribute towards the limit as much).
https://www.itmedia.co.jp/news/articles/2412/03/news133.html Visa reaffirms their position when quizzed by #Japan lawmaker on statement made by rep (financial censorship issue). #FreeSpeech #anime #HumanRights
Software Engineer. Psy / Tech / Sex Science Enthusiast. Controversial?
Free Expression. Human rights / Civil Liberties. Anime. Liberal.