There’s an open question here about best practice, because ultimately shifting labour capacity from humans to machines should be inherently good, if its labour we did not want to be doing. I’d rather have machines capable of doing everything from my laundry to large data analysis, among many other things that don’t interest me.

The problem tends to arise in how the transition happens. If capitalists continue to separate labour from surplus value, it’s entirely possible that the benefits of automation are only experienced by capitalists, and the humans who were producing the labour are left destitute.

Really I would like to see a better regulatory environment mixed with stronger social support systems, so the benefits of automation are felt by everybody. Sometimes it feels like the focus shifts to stopping automation, when in my mind best practice should be to mitigate externalities and spread out the benefits.

Do you mean Substack?

Out of curiosity, could you link to/share your research for us? The open source stuff in particular?

Calling this terrorism is ridiculous. They were trying to get in to a military base which stationed bombers actively used in the ongoing war. Reminds me of the ploughshares movement if it wasn’t sponsored by Iran.

I’m not going to argue against your conclusion, I strongly believe we do not have anything resembling human consciousness in software yet.

But Penrose was definitely not proven right (unless you’re talking about black holes), nor was the Orch OR theory about microtubules proven, nor was consciousness proven to be a quantum phenomenon. Here’s an easy, accessible article that goes over the state of the research: https://www.breezyscroll.com/science/new-quantum-evidence-is-reopening-the-debate-over-penroses-theory-of-consciousness/

It also creates fewer philosophical problems if you distinguish between countable and uncountable adjectives. Though, I suppose that’s a less philosophical point than you made.

I’m learning from this thread that the user base here is overwhelmingly male.

Appreciate it!

The call to action for their product, “protect your identity now,” makes me extremely suspicious of the entire thing.

Just because they operate out of China, that doesn’t make them anti-capitalist. Frankly, despite its name, China has a capitalist economy, just with much stronger authoritarianism than most.

I can’t understand why anybody uses these products.

Okay, I can, it’s marketing and ease of access. I guess it just annoys me that people don’t care.

Because my wife likes it, and she’s pretty important to me.

You’re right though, it’s certainly not a private p2p network.

I always forget that Snapchat has a public side to it. My wife and I just use it as a messaging app for videos/pictures.

deleted by creator