Here's what's boring: None of the folks who want to yammer endlessly about various violations of the moral zeitgeist want to get serious about the IS vs OUGHT distinction in AI ethics. When I try to get them to talk seriously about this issue, they start questioning my motives.
You are a prime example. Take "racists" at their word when they say they want to get at the truth, even though you think they'll regret the "real" truth when it comes out. Why not humiliate them in their "racist" beliefs with the truth? Are you afraid your approach to AGI is inadequate to discover the truth latent in the data? Is that why you posture about who is serious about the truth rather than just getting on with it? Your posturing as a moral superior in some sense does nothing for your credibility. Get on with the discovery of the truth. On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 1:49 PM YKY (Yan King Yin, 甄景贤) < [email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 11:17 PM James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 1:28 AM YKY (Yan King Yin, 甄景贤) < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I don't know why you add the word "male" in selection because females >>> are also subject to selection. That is sexist. >>> >> >> Oh good grief. Are you *really* going to say that it is "sexist" to >> assert that the very term "mano-a-mano" is "sexist" because it implies a >> statistically greater involvement of males in duels over critical resources? >> >> "The Bell Curve" as title to the book by that name was carefully chosen >> precisely because the go-to tool in the sleazy moral zeitgeist's toolbox is >> to attack simple statements of statistical fact as statements of >> deterministic fact. Yet despite Murray and Herrnstein's effort to bend >> over backwards to avoid the resulting sleaze being thrown at them, college >> campuses -- the very places one should expect to be bastions of reason and >> objectivity -- are so saturated with intellectual sleaze that Murray was >> physically attacked. >> >> This is tiresome. But worse ... it is boring. >> >> I wish your project well, but you're really not in the right state of >> mind for it. >> > > Explain to us why you think human females are exempt from Darwinian > selection? > > It's strange that you bring the topic of the sexes into this discussion of > racism. But I understand what you're thinking, only you don't understand > what you're thinking. These days, people are talking about the decline of > the American empire, the druggies on the streets, men acting effeminate, > etc. And they think that by putting the druggies back in jail and > persecuting transexuals will bring America back to greatness, but they > don't deal with their racism. The irony is that if they want to be great > again they should deal with the racism but not those other issues. > > What is not boring to you? Mein Kampf? 😄 > > People are not listening but talking over each other. They debate about > transexual women in sports, but they are just a miniscule percentage of the > population, the real issue is actually racism. > *Artificial General Intelligence List <https://agi.topicbox.com/latest>* > / AGI / see discussions <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + > participants <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + > delivery options <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> > Permalink > <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Tcf822b60238b0592-Md23eb132209505ff185e1151> > ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/Tcf822b60238b0592-Mae4ed1eb544fb60c4bf3efd6 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
