Apparently martin82's comment was too subtle for you so here it is more explicitly. The BBC has a long history of antisemitic and anti-Israel bias. This is not a secret.
Ok, let’s hope you are right on the anti-imperialism front and that the US citizens will not tolerate all that saber rattling against Greenland, Canada, and the Panama Canal…
or maybe you are just misunderstanding and rationalizing what’s going on to tell yourself that everything is going fine on the US politics side of things while the rest of the world is waking up to the fact that you voted a narcissistic authoritarian into office.
Therefore, the boss will have to be nice to them. Therefore, the boss can't be a horrible person.
You should study up on logic. You are saying that since person A has to be nice to people who work for startups they can’t be a horrible person. This means that if a person is horrible they can’t be nice to people who work for startups. This is egregiously wrong.
I think what PG is saying in this situation is, he's using "evil" as shorthand for "is not nice to their employees", whereas you're reading it as "is fundamentally bad in every way".
There are also bikes with wind shields and roofs. Also battery powered acceleration support. Probably also heating if you are so inclined. Just saying bikes can be pretty comfortable if that’s what you need.
As someone enjoying a vegan lifestyle, I am living proof that humans do not need to eat other animals. Also if we would stop the cruel practice of factory farming, it’s common knowledge that we would have more calories available for us humans. In terms of sustenance, we are going out of our way to hurt humans and other animals to uphold the entrenched consumption patterns of a select few.
I think for AI overlords the question will be quite similar… how should we use the resources which we have available? Who is worthy of consideration and who is not? At the moment, we are truly not making a great case for keeping us around because anything we can do, they can do better. So why keep us around if not for some ethical insight?
I find the tone and collective mindset expressed in this article deeply unsettling. We are talking about developing technology that is going to be the foundation and a huge challange for the longterm development of the human race and people are overtly stating that they are working on this because they perceive this to be a shot at making trillions of dollars. I mean, what the fuck, how can money be the right motivator here? This technology would change everything about what it means to be human and we do it because „we can make money“? This is so shortsighted it’s almost tragically laughable. And we as a society worship people talking this way as somekind of heropreneuers. Like anyone alive today would be able to do anything without all the people supporting our continent crossing supply chains that are crazy environmentally destructive and allround unsustainable.
Sorry for this rant but come we can do better than this!
Would be interesting if they did the same thing for their own operation. „We collect all data that we can about you, so that we can become a mega corp that can control most of your life.“ Wonder why they don’t do it?
You are making very big assumptions here. Think about it, what if the universe is a dynamical system? There would never be any truth only systems which work or are broken according to some set of criteria. Moreover, which systems work would also be a function of their context/environment. Nothing would ever be revealed because dynamical systems can always change (also see problem of induction). Things just work or don‘t work according to your interpretation. I would recommend to look up Pragmatism as a philosophy that elaborates on this line of thinking. It‘s quite enlightening and puts a lot of things we are talking about today into perspective.
