Why censorship? If their criticism is fair, people should see it

So you’re saying you like echo chambers and your poor little brain can’t survive without a constant stream of hopium?

No

I'm very much an optimist when it comes to the singularity, but this is a bad idea.

no it should be about singularity and events leading towards it. Not whether singularity is goo d or bad

We shouldn’t censor people. In fact; we should have room for criticism of progress while also being devout cheerleaders of it.

The culture here is known for being very pro-technology, so luddites are unlikely to come here in the first place

Good point, unnecessary attitude.

Well then name it …..optimisticfuture or something similar instead of singularity

The problem is techno-pessimism is almost never productive, it’s nearly always just nihilistic bitching. I sort of feel like if people are going to post techno pessimistic comments they should actually be offering some constructive opinions instead of just saying how fucked we all are.

“Can we have this be our own special sparkle fantasy fun land with no one making any valid criticisms or pointing out contravening facts?” 🥺

As everyone else has said, this produces an “echo chamber” of sorts with no sense of opposition towards important topics in science and technology. Pessimism, based in reality, should always be welcome - same goes for optimism for technological progress, as long as its based in reality.

The problem with this is that I don't want to have to figure out where the line between discussing concerns and being labeled "anti-technology" or a "luddite". I don't think I'd likely be miscatergorized, but I could imagine it being very frustrating, and create a wet-woel effect on conversations that could be useful.

I think encouraging each other's optimistic perspective, through voting and interaction, will do a better job than prohibiting the alternative. Make the optimistic threads exciting to be a part of, and let the contrast of the pessimism be do the convincing for you.

The problem is that doomerism is sort of the default opinion, so the more people who show up with only a casual interest, the more you'll hear the same few pessimistic ideas repeated over and over. That's what turned futurology into just an echo chamber. (With a weird obsession with synthetic meat for some reason.)

I would be cool with that.

Well said.

Do you want a cult? Because that's how you get a cult.

Name me at least 5 movies where technological progress was exhibited as something good.

Kurzweil's wager: By trusting tech, what you have to lose?

Imitation Game October Sky The Right Stuff Temple Grandin Quest for Fire

Well, you probably love movies a lot, but most people couldn't name a similar list

Most of all it would be a unique experience ie not the same shit that is on every fucking page on the internet.

The same old demoralization is just mind numbing, brain rotting.

Yeah let's talk about the fucking heat death of the universe or something equally important.

I think in reality the subjects of films have not to do with the fate of technology or the beliefs of most humans but what 18-40 year old men will pay $20 to see. Your comment holds more water when applied to futurist films but literary futurism consist almost exclusively of cautionary tales and even they have more to say about those who weild technology than the tech itself. So part of the issue seems to be that the genre of futuristic speculative fiction is almost exclusively dark in tone. This has as much to do with marketing costs and audience expectations as anything else I expect. We don't watch Mad Max and The Matrix because they are more plausible than a film about a world in which technology heals society but because it is more compelling entertainment. Works about the future reveal our feelings about the present more than anything imo.

Real doomers don't watch movies.

Then why is r/futurology so negative?

Ok, five sci-fi movies. Basically every sci-fi movie now is set in a shithole.

I agree that we shouldn't censor people, but saying that Luddites and skeptics aren't commonplace here simply isn't supported by reality. There's a 50/50 divide at the very absolute best.

Obnoxious post. I don't think we should censor people, but saying that criticism is inherently valid is just dumb. A lot of the cynical, skeptical posts here have erroneous criticisms divorced from reality that are in absolutely no way whatsoever even the tiniest bit worth respecting.

Moron. Why do people on the skeptic/cynic side always act as though that criticism can never be invalid, that the points their 'side' raises can never be wrong or poorly-considered, and that anyone who dislikes them must do so because they're fragile little idiots who can't handle the truth (which, of course, everything the techno-skeptic side says is, because they can never be wrong on anything)?

While I think that self-proclaimed realists/skeptics/cynics are fucking morons and nowhere near as intelligent as they believe themselves to be, and even though I'd be happy if they fucked off forever and stopped swarming every futurism-centered community like locusts, and while I desperately wish that they would realize that it's possible for others to dislike them because they're genuinely stupid people who say genuinely stupid thing and not because they're stone cold badasses who tell it like it is and upset people who overdose on hopium and simply can't handle the truth (because self-proclaimed cynics and realists are incapable of arguing without resorting to strawmanning)... no, we shouldn't engage in censorship. We should just band together more often and tell the idiots here how and why they're idiots.

...the fuck should I know??

I agree that trite cynicism can derail the atmosphere of optimism here, and am very much rethinking my deep cynicism.

I almost want to agree with you, censorship is the dystopian tactic to apply by technology, to simply delete unapproved conversations by an all powerful administrator. How futuristic can you get?

I think I'll be mindful of extinguishing optimism & enthusiasm, it's definitely not the end road I'm aiming for. But crikey, have you seen Westworld???

Your post looks very smart

This is my direction to my department at work. If you find a problem, have a solution when you bring it to me. Doesn't have to be the right solution but at least try.

I try to use it for family/personal quarrels etc.

i agree. anti tech must be silenced here. otherwise it woud just turn into like libertarian sub where socialists and so on roam on and outnumber actual libertarians coz muuuuuuuuuuh free speech. meanwhile socialism and communism subs censor opposite viewpoints with ban hammers all the time.

Go make r/raptureofthenerds to create the good vibes only version. This sub currently does discuss the good and the bad…

I assume this is in reference to communities like r/antiwork and r/wallstreetbets, which became fundamentally different communities after their 15 minutes of fame.

I'm sure this will happen to r/singularity or an adjacent community where somebody famous mentions the concept and "normies" flood the subreddit with opinions the regulars consider lowbrow.

The answer obviously isn't to gatekeep people who are interested in learning, though the community would have to make some clarifications. This subreddit already has a rule for no low quality posting. Does that include doomerism? Does it include non-empirical suspicions about an AI-driven apocalypse?

If have no idea when this will happen, or if it'll happen at all, and by extension, we don't know what the Reddit or broader Internet landscape will be like. Like many of the topics we discuss, there are a lot of unknowns, and most likely, it'd be best to leave this to the people of the time to decide what they want to happen.

what makes you entitled to say what should and shouldnt be on here?

This has happened to me before.