Freire_Herval

The sentence did mention china has done it on the first attempt which is also factual and relevant to context. The article is about moon landings and associated failures.

As for the Apollo program everyone knows about it. There's no point in regurgitating obvious facts.

Comment · 3 years ago

>That's not denying some objective truth, because "specialness" isn't an objective thing that can be measured. It's, effectively, an opinion.

Well then let's talk about what I mean by "special".

If I gave you some art whether it's written, drawn or filmed and I asked you to tell me whether this "art" was created by a human and an AI, and you have trouble identifying the difference... then objectively speaking humans are no longer special. That is the definition I am using here.

There's no point in making up "opinions" and discussing those because they will always be different. Thus when communicating we are always talking about a shared reality. That includes the "term" special. I have defined what I mean by "special" here concretely so we can keep the conversation consistent rather then diverge onto branches according to our own personal definitions of "special".

>Humans don't have to be special in some grand sense to consider that problematic.

I never said it wasn't problematic. I said it was truth. The truth is the problem. Being honest and aware of reality is the intrinsic problem here. Being delusional is the cure.

Comment · 3 years ago

I agree that it will lead us to a bad place.

But here's the problem. This saying: "Humans are not special" is completely true. To deny this idea is to deny the truth.

Ultimately to save ourselves, our culture must engage in self deception. We must trick ourselves into believing that AI content is inferior and thereby maintain economic demand for content not created by AI. I can see it happening as a mass hysteria similar to how the public was resistant against "new coke" (https://www.damninteresting.com/the-american-gustation-crisi...)

You will see that many people, including people on HN, are already doing this. There's a large cohort of people generating huge adamant denial on the potential of AI.

The OP is sort of being a bit too honest with himself, most people who flat out refuse to acknowledge AI will do so with the idea that AI is inferior and will always be that way.

Comment · 3 years ago

Creating content is easy too, tons of people do it. AI is still a nascent technology so it's not involved in the creation as much.. yet.

Comment · 3 years ago

Brain facilities that were previously evolved to gain a darwinian competitive edge through strategic intelligence can now be utilized to break the mold of natural selection.

There was no direct selection pressure that coordinated the development of your ability to understand evolutionary psychology. Evolutionary psychology is a side effect of intelligence. Breaking past our darwinian purpose is a side effect of our meta understanding of evolutionary biology and intelligence. As someone else said we, to a limited extend, can make our own purpose.

Comment · 3 years ago

My purpose is to sit while AI takes care of everything and keeps me happy. I want to live in the matrix where I have 30 hot model wives and not know any better. The simulation of course will make me a chad and emperor of the world. That's my purpose.

Comment · 3 years ago

>You can make your situation and the worlds better by doing the right thing.

Did you not read what I wrote? You or I both doing the right thing changes nothing.

Comment · 3 years ago

So if humans aren't special at anything, then humans don't really have a purpose. I envision a future similar to the one in Wall-E and it's not exactly bad so long as the AI actually acts in our interest.