niboras
niboras t1_j8j4gip wrote
Reply to comment by Doompug0477 in Drawing the line between positive use of technology and degeneracy by [deleted]
No just making up an example to say we have that exact possibility right now and the system as a whole still “works.” There will always be people who opt out of the gene pool. Technology doesn’t change that. But getting into peoples private lives isnt somthing we should be doing if it doest affect the broader population in a harmful way. If social media is so addictive no one is having sex, you dont force people to procreate, you regulate social media.
niboras t1_j8h991s wrote
Reply to comment by [deleted] in Drawing the line between positive use of technology and degeneracy by [deleted]
What if I just dont like moving? Is it ok If I lay in bed and write software all day? Or trade stocks? Or play xbox? What if Im a twitch streamer and I make money off playing games for hours? Does my reason for wanting the toilet bed matter? Why does it matter? And who gets to decide. Should an able bodied person not be allowed to by a wheelchair? What about a scooter? How obese do I need to be to qualify?
niboras t1_j8h8ms9 wrote
Reply to comment by drop_database_run in Drawing the line between positive use of technology and degeneracy by [deleted]
Sure but what if we all just individually decide to never have kids? Not degenerate,no one harmed, we all die in a generation. We dont need fancy tech for the scenario. However if we determined that tiktok was so addictive no one ever had sex we may want to regulate that. Maybe thats what OP is trying to get at but its sorta coming off as “the right people” need to decide how transhuman the creative freaky masses are allowed to get.
niboras t1_j70onpc wrote
Reply to I finally think the concept of AGI is misleading, fueled by all the hype, and will never happen by ReExperienceUrSenses
Never is a long time. The fact that we are made of a couple dozen elements and we can think means at the very least we could use synthetic biology to create a flesh brain similar to ours and then improve it as we go. Conversely maybe you are right but then that probably means we arent actually intelligent either. We just think we are. Maybe that should be a test. A thing is intelligent if it can design an intelligence equal or greater than itself (sex doesn’t count).
niboras t1_j1oqqb7 wrote
Reply to comment by Goalie_deacon in TIL that Flick from ‘A Christmas Story’ went into Porn in the 1990s by PlayingCarded
“Hey Harrahan! Your wife’s a dyke!” Edit: I should clarify that the only reason I remember this is a guy I went to HS with whose nickname was unironically “buba” talked about nothing else for a week after this movie came out.
niboras t1_iymg3bd wrote
Reply to comment by patryuji in Is it possible that nuclear defense technologies will surpass the abilities of nuclear weapons in the future, rendering them near useless? by Wide-Escape-5618
You mean like missile command? Do they have to use a roller ball to target?
niboras t1_j8mu0y9 wrote
Reply to comment by Sindertone in Study finds link between ‘free sugar’ intake and cardiovascular disease by YoanB
From the posted definition, the milk is fine. Honey is just pure sugar. It isn’t explicitly called out but it is chemically almost identical to white table sugar.