Xi Jinping's name is on the list...

Fuck off

No, I'm saying right now will not look much different than the 19th century in the future. We invented penicilin and some cool tech, but we're still plagued by all the same miseries. In a future without all these they'll look back and say the same things with even greater certainty about us.

I'm not saying that's the guaranteed future we're headed, no one knows where we're headed. But you see these kind of people dictating others happiness all over the place. Yeah sorry buddy, telling someone to just be happy doesn't help. Telling them to be grateful is even worse when you have no idea what they're going through. It basically boils down to "But someone is having it tougher than you!" Yeah no shit there is. Other peoples misery doesn't help me though.

Yeah have fun telling yourself you're one of the lucky ones before you end up in the history books of future generations as a case of extreme hardship and ignorance. I'm sure those in paradise would agree with you.

Alright be grateful if you want but don't go around telling people what they should and should not be grateful for ffs. So I should be grateful when in 100 years there may no more be wars and diseases, death and starvation, crimes, religion and corruption? But of course, I need to be grateful because Wolfieze from reddit said so.

>and if only a few people end up controlling AGIs, ASIs, I want to be one of them.

Please don't start a company. We don't need anyone trying to control AGI to be at the top.

Tom Scott from 2 weeks ago

People were saying the same thing with Dall-E and SD. Technically they were right, but by that time there were already new 'toys' available so the underlying problem is still here, it just shifted from Dall-E to chatGPT. And the same thing will happen again and again at this rate of progress if we don't make up our minds to setup some rules.

"Diabetes - Is it something you are born with? Do you catch it? Is it a disease? Do you make yourself get it? Do you change the state of your body to get there?"

Lol good try. Fucking idiot.

Wtf are you talking about. It's a benchmark, it's to compare performance. I'm not setting any bar, and I'm not expecting it to beat human experts immediately.

No. I haven't seen anyone talking about it because it beat humans, it was always about it beating GPT-3 with less than 1B parameters. Beating humans was just the cherry on top. The paper is "flashy" enough, including experts wouldn't change that. Many papers do include expert performance as well, it's not a stretch to expect it.

rip, they should've included expert performance as well then

yup and correcr me if I'm wrong, but those aren't average humans either, those are experts in their fields

They did not create a wormhole, they simulated one with a mathematical model using a quantum computer.

Hope you're doing better by now. Thanks for the discussion, take care.

Anything from general education about our world and universe to natural sciences and more. But most importantly scientific, critical and rational thinking. The more the better. The quality of the education is of utmost importance as well. Sadly education isn't given the importance it needs in most places today, it has only become a tool to teach you how to do certain jobs. Anything that's not directly related to ones profession is dismissed as unnecessary. I don't consider the majority of students to be much educated in the scientific way, and with people who haven't visited a school or university for ages this tends to be even worse.

Anyways, this trend is very noticable in all of our societies, and there is nothing suggesting it would suddenly change the higher you go. This is where the whole debate began.

Since it's so hard to get you to understand things I was gonna go about it slowly, but it seems like no way works for you. No wonder you're opposing education as a solution, people tend to dislike what they don't understand.

It is as I said, criminality has lots of reasons, and those reasons can generally be solved through education. I don't think I can simplify this any further for you.

If that's your answer, that's quite tragic. You're expecting a straight answer to a question which has no straight answer. You're expecting the world to fit your ideals because that's easier to understand for you.

However, if you want one and only one answer, all I can say is learn to ask why. Teach people to ask why. Rational scientific thought is the only way out.

Very well. As you by now understand as well, criminality is complex and multifaceted. There are countless reasons for why somebody would potentially do something that could harm somebody else. There are evolutionary reasons, poverty, fear, security concerns, potentially hundreds of psychological reasons, and many many more we're not aware of.

Now what's the next step? We can ask why. Why do we have evolutionary biases pushing us to do crimes? Why is there poverty? Why is there [insert issue]?

You notice, these are all very complex questions in and of themselves. But if you can answer these, if only partially, you can move on to the next step.

How can we solve this? (I'll be waiting for your answer)

No, you just seriously lack reading comprehension skills and did not understand at all what I said, not in the original post, nor in the discussion thereafter.

And look, you just again made a strawman... of course things like poverty and security are big factors for crime. Life isn't as simple as you could attribute a single cause for such complex issues. That's an entirely different topic. And it seems for you I have to simplify this even further: I'm not saying the cause of criminality is the lack of education. Education is the solution.

If you seriously disagree with this, that's nothing but ignorance, and I have nothing left to say to someone like that.

Dude it can not be this hard to understand. I'm not dodging the question, I literally just rephrased what I said so people like you could understand it.

>there is a very clear trend of criminality decreasing with the level of education an individual gets.

and

>We can observe that stealing (and criminality in general) is inversely proportional with the level of education someone has.

and

>(criminal) behaviour is seen less and less as the person grows in experience and education.

All state the same EXACT thing. Like literally 1:1, I have no idea what you're still going on about.

If I had to take a guess, you missunderstood my position from the very start and thought I'm defending all and every educated person, which simply is not the case. And now instead of accepting your rash judgement you keep insisting on it.

You lack serious reading comprehension skills. Both of what you're citing state the exact same thing I pointed out for you just one commemt above.

Here you are again arguing with made up claims. Look, this here is the one and only claim I'm making in the entire thread:

>[...] there is a very clear trend of criminality decreasing with the level of education an individual gets.

If you agree with the above statement, then good, we have nothing to talk about as we're agreeing with each other.

If you disagree we have nothing to talk about together either as you would evidently need to look up some very basic statistics on our society, which would be embarassing for a grown up not to know about.

You don't need to be educated nor intelligent to be rich. And in politics usually the loudest ones rise to the top, not the clever ones. They're some of the worst people alive, their behavior rewarded by our corrupt systems of governance.

And again you're falling for yet another strawman fallacy. I did not say the educated don't steal, I'm saying there is a very clear trend of criminality decreasing with the level of education an individual gets. There's bound to be exceptions, but the trend is enough if we're going to make predictions about an entity which takes this to the limit.

You're falling for the strawman fallacy. No one's talking about the rich and certainly not about political figures.