Social media intently addictive? Can't be

[AzNightmare]

Originally Posted by welfare

"technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal"-Albert Einstein
Would you say he was silly to say that?

No, because that quote came from within the context of warfare. I would say it's silly of you to use that quote out of context over something as revolutionary as the internet (or other technological advancements) though. You focus on the one step back, instead of the ten steps forward.

[welfare]

Well, Einstein was actually fairly vocal of his concerns with technology in general. And not just in the context of war.
There are many intelligent people who speak cautiously of technology. Stephen Hawking for one.
It's not as crazy a notion as you may think.
If you think the ratio is ten to one though, I'd say that proves severe bias.
Or maybe you've just never given much thought into the consequence of moving full speed ahead

[AzNightmare]

A lot of people misquote Einstein or stretch things out of context.
https://www.snopes.com/einstein-technology-quote/

TL;DR, his fear was in the context of war, but people love to apply his "quotes" out of context, conveniently for purposes of anti-technology (espcially smart phone) campaigns. Not to mention, just because he's famous for being a genius doesn't automatically make everything he says infallible.

Hawkins fear was more toward AI taking over. That's a very specific aspect in technology. What about the very technology that enables him "talk"? Does he hate that too? I don't think so.

My ten to one ratio was an example. It could be two to one. The point is, human civilization is taking steps forward. My severe "bias" comes simply from the real world examples of how technology has improved life. Your example was missing video stores, when everyone else has moved on to Netflix or some equivalent.

[twitchyzero]

good discussion

relevant: was it a good idea to shut down Skynet?

Facebook shuts down robots after they invent their own language$

[welfare]

Originally Posted by AzNightmare

A lot of people misquote Einstein or stretch things out of context.
https://www.snopes.com/einstein-technology-quote/

TL;DR, his fear was in the context of war, but people love to apply his "quotes" out of context, conveniently for purposes of anti-technology (espcially smart phone) campaigns. Not to mention, just because he's famous for being a genius doesn't automatically make everything he says infallible.

Hawkins fear was more toward AI taking over. That's a very specific aspect in technology. What about the very technology that enables him "talk"? Does he hate that too? I don't think so.

My ten to one ratio was an example. It could be two to one. The point is, human civilization is taking steps forward. My severe "bias" comes simply from the real world examples of how technology has improved life. Your example was missing video stores, when everyone else has moved on to Netflix or some equivalent.

What are Einstein?s And Hawking?s Key Insights? ? Voluntary Enslavement - Technology's fast developement reduces freedom and diversity

I really don't think we need Einstein or Hawking to explain that there are grave dangers in technological progress.
Like I said previously, there are, of course, benefits and consequences. The problem is the consequences aren't often known until they're reached. Beyond the absence of video stores lol.
So at what point is too much of a good thing more harm than good?
For how grand technology is, it sure seems to have complicated society.
And if you believe that the more complex something is, the greater the chance of failure, then technological progress would actually be seen as regress in terms of maintaining a civilization for as long as possible.

"life is really simple. But we insist on making it complicated"-Confucius
I know. Me and my quotes lol

[Bouncing Bettys]

YouTube (Short URL)

[welfare]

Originally Posted by twitchyzero

good discussion

I think so. I mean, it encompasses all of society. What we are and where we're going. It doesn't get more relative than that.

relevant: was it a good idea to shut down Skynet?

Facebook shuts down robots after they invent their own language$

The combination of money, power, and intelligence in that scale really worries me. I really don't trust him.
Facebook pulled in almost 9b$ last year in advertising alone. 6b$ the year prior.

This is also interesting:
https://www.thestar.com/business/201...-it-seems.html

Zuckerberg and Chan, by contrast, have created as the repository of their donations a private company, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative L.L.C. Like all privately held companies, this one is a black box. It is not obligated to report on its activities, which, legally, can include lobbying, owning for-profit companies. and making no donations whatsoever,

Zuckerberg and Chan insist on this arrangement because they want to be free to lobby, to invest in for-profit enterprises doing what they regard as noble work, and otherwise be able to affect public policy and social outcomes in whatever way they chose. That’s perfectly legal. Just don’t call it a charity

[welfare]

Ted Kaczynski's (the unabomer) manifesto. A revelation of it's time:

washingtonpost.com: Unabomber Special Report

The craziest thing about it is how much sense it makes