PJ @pj@qoto.org

@dustcircle@home.social

Are the 'scarry moments' because all those "creations" look more like nightmares than dreams?

@doctorambient

I meant physically break, like with a hammer.
It may break other, immaterial things we depend on, such as confidence, feelings, and self-worth though, depending on how you approach it.
As true for any other #tool the purpose of #AI is also the #augmentation of human capabilities. In the case of this particular tool the augmented abilities are #intellectual rather than #physical. It will augment in the same way wisdom as it will stupidity.

>The best things in #life we don’t choose — they choose us. A great love, a great calling, a great illumination — they happen unto us, like light falling upon that which is lit. We have given a name to these unbidden greatnesses — #genius, from the Latin for “spirit,” denoting the spirit of a universe we can only submit to but cannot govern.

https://www.themarginalian.org/2023/01/21/emerson-genius-shakespeare

>For subjectivists #life is meaningful, they say, but its value is made by us in our minds, and subject to change over time. Landau argues that #meaning is essentially a sense of worth which we may all derive in a different way - from relationships, creativity, accomplishment in a given field, or generosity, among other possibilities

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/the-secret-to-a-meaningful-life-is-simpler-than-you-think

@doctorambient

Isn't it the same with all tools? I would be concerned about someone having a hammer and not knowing how to use it.

At least with *chatGPT* they can't break anything. 😀

I feel something is wrong with this line of reasoning but I can't quite put my finger on it.

It has something to do with the flawed assumption that it is social media that "rips the fabric of civil society".🤔 What about the effects of the growing #inequality between the rich becoming wealthier and the poor even more impoverished?

#SocialMedia, despite all its flaws, is actually the only democratic tool able to increase global awareness about the fact that such economic inequalities, despite being a global phenomenon do not originate from some "others" (race, nation, religion), but from your very "own people".

The excerpt is from:
https://www.eurasiagroup.net/issues/top-risks-2023

Lots of interesting articles in this issue of ***Collective Intelligence***

https://journals.sagepub.com/articles/COL

Do you agree with #Plato that
> *in a system where political power (‘cratos’) lies in the hands of the people (‘demos’) statecraft is not guaranteed? In fact, it is unlikely, that those best equipped to rule will get a chance to manage public affairs because the loudest voices will dominate, irrational, ill-motivated decisions will be made and the complex arena of politics is in need of careful ordering and management will turn into a crazy circus.*
https://philosophynow.org/issues/101/The_Ship_of_Fools

The follow-up to this bit:

>**Bezos**: "I'm going to space so you can go to space one day"

>**Me**: "I don't want to go to space. I want to go to Italy. Can you work on that?"

https://twitter.com/i/status/1473386289424650244

@aebrockwell @hasmis @freemo

Reminds me of this #demotivator poster: **IDIOCY**
*Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.*
https://despair.com/products/idiocy

The exciting future of #energy is in Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)

➡️ Along with solar, wind, and water, more #diversity in the used technologies means better overall performance and #robustness.
➡️ Simpler #distribution with local clean and small-footprint #production means there is no need for long unsightly power-lines
➡️ Better #safety (smaller reactors and energy outputs means also smaller consequences of possible failure.

I'm waiting for the model below to install on my 1983 DeLorean😀:

https://spectrum.ieee.org/small-modular-reactors

@rosactrl

Maybe? What else can be done? I don't see the author having an alternative to what they call "Popperianism" that, as they state, "has a great deal to answer for the incalculable (sic) damage done not just to science but to human wellbeing"?

The falsification was never a problem for science. Without falsification, science would be just another "debate club" where all opinions and theories are equally valid. If all theories are not questioned and falsifiable ones discarded from science as a matter of principle, we may as well start teaching "flat Earth" theory in geography classes and "creationism" in biology and wait for the "incalculable" improvement this will bring to human well-being.

To think about it, maybe that's the author's idea of where science should be heading next.

@rosactrl

"Liberating" science from falsification will not help in convincing climate and other "skeptics" (actually ***deniers***) of its validity. Quite the contrary, it will just add fuel for more denying.

A better approach is to find better, creative ways of presenting scientific facts to the general public like in this case:

https://climate.nasa.gov/climate_resources/300/video-climate-spiral/

**Radio Paradise** is having a party and you are invited:
***New Year's Eve VR Live Stream***
https://radioparadise.com/blog/new-years-eve-vr-livestream

I believe none of the stated *reasons* for revisiting "#Darwin'sDangerousIdea" in this most-read Guardian article of 2022 will have any effect on how "#ModernSynthesis" explains #Evolution.

For example:

1️⃣ "The study of the way *organisms alter their environment* in order to reduce the normal pressure of natural selection – think of beavers building dams" only shows that #NaturalSelection favors beavers *genetically programmed* to build better dams.

2️⃣ "The *Senegal bichir* adapting to land in a single generation” and *dung beetles* growing larger wings in cold weather only show the co-producing relationship between *nature* and *nurture* and the known fact that the ***same*** set of genes (*genotype*) will produce slightly different *phenotypes* in different environments. It surely does not explain *speciation*.

and lastly

3️⃣ I really don't see the difference between passing to the next generation randomly as opposed to artificially induced *mutations*. Natural selection will *"weed out"* one **and** the other the same way.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2022/jun/28/do-we-need-a-new-theory-of-evolution

@DrJLCatlett

I have the feeling that the option does not apply to replies. Just to original toots.

@DrJLCatlett

Found it.
Thanks. I think mine was already set to "Public".