Comment on Thousands of people are selling their identities to train AI – but at what cost?
MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks agoNo, you’re right. Murder being illegal hasn’t saved a single life.
Whatever “justice” system you’ve been witness to, must have you seriously confused if it has you thinking it is the only one that can exist.
Bad systems should be removed. But their existence does not mean good systems are not possible.
And you will never see the real picture until you ditch simplifications like “laws bad”.
youcantreadthis@quokk.au 2 weeks ago
I think systems based on violence are bad, because i think violence is bad. Because theyre systems of violence, i do not think theres a way to be rid of them short of violence, but i think avoiding systematizing that violence minimizes the collateral harms.
I dont think murder being illegal has saved more lives than it has cost. I will not elaborate upon my ecidence, but it is from places squalid and opulent, decadent and visceral. The light it casts you in makes you look like a violent selfish child willing to kill–by proxy only, of course– to not have to consider the violence that is every calorie of sustenance to them.
MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
Poetic.
Violence is to defect.
Some will always choose to defect.
To wish for a system where such defectors are not dealt with the only way which is effective, is naive.
That you think I need to be told that that’s still violence, even more so.
youcantreadthis@quokk.au 2 weeks ago
So to start off with, youre using one example of game theory, the prisoners dilemma, as a stand in for right/wrong.
Which is so fucking many levels of insane i cant even address here.
Are you in the bay area? That seems like san francisco brand stupid.
Then you project your oversimplification onto me. Thats cool. Inspecting your intellectual lacunae is hella cool. You should try it.
MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
I’m not. People can also co-operate to do bad things. The principle still applies.
You either screw over others for individual benefit, or co-operate for collective benefit. That collective benefit can still be bad and come at the cost of ypur group defecting against another. Like a nation going to war.
Or a small group in an advantaged position co-operating to enforce laws against a far larger group.
Your oversimplification is stuff like “laws bad” or “violence bad”. Far more egregious imo.
At least I apply logic that can be adapted to describe multiple scenarios, instead of boiling things down to flat statements.