I’m sorry, but why do think questions like this give you the appearance of neutrality? They don’t. They make you look like an ignoramus content with armchair critiques, no matter how good the contained article actually is. Please, take the uprooting of our public health system seriously.

“But if enough people invest in the counterfeit money, it will be useful”

DO YOU ACTUALLY WANT THAT??

“If you can’t tell the difference, why does it matter?”

(a) Control again. Either a few companies spent a lot of time blurring the real/fake bounds or we became too dumb to notice
(b) if it’s fake. You didn’t earn it. Why should we accept taking cheap shortcuts that will bite you later?

“Currency is what you make of it. If you can make the fake money work, great. It doesn’t have to get political.”

When it’s made by a few people whose strategy is to replace everything so they are in control, it’s necessarily political.

Oh but you just haven’t tried the latest and greatest counterfeit money printers yet. You’re just a cynic and a Luddite.

Thanks for the acid reflux! 😅

Yes

Another: What are the main considerations for whether it is worthwhile to replace cognition? What are the risks? There are many books and articles on this, but finding ways to better draw the line and talk about it might be worthwhile. 19/fin

…more productive than with certain business people or techies. Input/output/functionality talk is more precise in many cases. Misinformation and shoddy WebMD use are very real examples. What about lawyers, scientists, artists? What can we learn from them? 18/n

Still trying to gather my thoughts and hash out some better questions, but I feel like there are some great threads to start from here: how might different professions naturally approach cognitive replacement? I’ve found talking to MDs (decent technical literacy and socially conscious) can be… 17/n

In the midst of so many deeply anti-social aspects of AI hype, it’s so important we build a backbone of framing and literacy around it, and you’re blind if you forget that it includes (nay centers on) historical, social, and psychological understanding 16/n

You can still address bias in training and copyright issues, but I really appreciate how the approach focuses more on history and is less immediately defensive 15/n

Labor obfuscation discussion follows readily. Then you have to ask who is in control of the cognitive replacement? What are the incentives for them? Why do you think they are contributing to the hype? 14/n