This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I see it as a herald for things to come. Perhaps you feel that furries are scum and deserve what's coming for them. That's all well and good, but the broader point to be read lies in the topic of job displacement in general.
"AI workers replace humans" used to be a prediction, not an accurate description of current reality. We now have (or are on the brink of having) a successful demonstration of just that. The reactions and policies and changes that arrive from the current ongoing chaos are going to set precedent for future battles involving first-world job replacement, and I am personally very interested in seeing what kind of slogans and parties and perhaps even extremism emerges from our first global experiment.
"Technology displaces workers" is not a new thing or a very controversial prediction that I am aware of anyone on the other side of. The contentious prediction is that AI would create structural persistent unemployment effects across the entire economy which every prior technological paradigm shift has yet failed to do. A few commission artists having to find jobs elsewhere in the service sector won't be evidence for that, nor would they really be the first to be impacted by AI in general (most translation work is now done by deep learning models, for example -- similar to AI art, a human in the loop is only necessary when the requirements are particularly complex or the quality demanded exceeds some nominal bar).
The part that you might not quite appreciate if you weren't monitoring every advance in this field is how quickly things have improved, which is to say how rapidly this disruption occurred.
We passed a point where computers became better at chess than any possible human a couple decades ago. Computers became better at Go about 6 years ago. This year they became better at producing art than 99.9% of humans, and they're certainly faster at it than any human could be. Most of the advances there occurred in the last 2 years.
And now there are models that can be applied to basically any game or task that can be effectively digitized, and can reliably train themselves to [better-than-human levels in a matter of days, maybe weeks.]
That's not to say that we're going to see unprecedented levels of 'hard' unemployment, but it is likely to sweep into unexpected places in very short order.
More options
Context Copy link
Completely true. Current advances do not guarantee the "no more jobs" dystopia many predict. My excitement is likely primarily a result of how much I've involved myself in observing this specific little burst of technological displacement.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link