Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[itisnotlogical]

The Wacky Adventures of Ronald Mcdonald

I kind of hate that I'm learning all this weird McDonald's trivia the more I work there

[King Kitteh]

The idea that people are useless is offensive to me, and generally leads to dangerous territory besides. What do you propose the people who can't support themselves anymore do now that they've become "obsolete"?

I have nothing to say to your offense. It's only natural I suppose.

To your question, if I were to create a world where machines do everything. People would have all the support they'd need. That is, if I decide to have a society that supports people. If I were more ruthless by our societies moral view, I'd perhaps remove people who are a net loss to the system. Perhaps I'd remove all people. Does it really matter?

I certainly hope King Kitteh doesn't actually believe these things, and is in fact pulling our legs with this bizarre argument.
Possibly to mock transhumanism. Poe's Law, as it is often described on this forum.

Otherwise I would be somewhat concerned for them.

This is my response to the idea that the physical world is all that exists, and there is nothing beyond death. No ultimate meaning to life.

Perhaps it a flaw in me, but I do believe in some life after death. I cannot comprehend a sudden vanishing, I also cannot comprehend how consciousness manifests itself in a brain that is only physical.

I don't personally have any meaning to my life. Except perhaps being happy and content, to be rich and not have to work. Maybe that's shallow, but that's me 

[IcyTea31]

Computers can indeed play music better than people. Or at least more "pure". Just find download a midi and find a program to play it. If the program is halfway decent it will produce the music perfectly in tune and perfectly in time.

Music isn't supposed to be 'pure'. Machines have no concept of ad libitum; they don't interpret and modify the piece to suit the occasion, their thoughts and emotions and those of the audience, other pieces in the set, and so on. While their technical ability can surpass humans, they can't truly perform music.

[Orange Wizard]

I have nothing to say to your offense. It's only natural I suppose.

The polite thing to do normally is to apologise for offending anyone. At least when you make a blanket statement like "I personally see the usefulness of people to be limited". The fact that you can tell people that you don't think they're very useful and when they take offense respond with "nur nur, it's only natural nur" is in itself offensive.

If I were more ruthless by our societies moral view, I'd perhaps remove people who are a net loss to the system. Perhaps I'd remove all people.

Literally worse than Hitler

Does it really matter?

To everyone who isn't a depressive nihilist, yes, it matters a great deal.

[King Kitteh]

Computers can indeed play music better than people. Or at least more "pure". Just find download a midi and find a program to play it. If the program is halfway decent it will produce the music perfectly in tune and perfectly in time.

Music isn't supposed to be 'pure'. Machines have no concept of ad libitum; they don't interpret and modify the piece to suit the occasion, their thoughts and emotions and those of the audience, other pieces in the set, and so on. While their technical ability can surpass humans, they can't truly perform music.

Interesting, but what if we had a machine that indeed could modify and interpret a piece for an occasion, that experienced emotion and though, that was able to perform!

Of course, the idea I'm getting to here is that; humans are themselves machines. Albeit flesh, organic and extremely complicated. People will deny this, saying human and mechanical machine are too different.

But what if we machined our own human? We produce people in a lab through artificial surrogates, modify the DNA as to create a human that would be the perfect musician!

Would that person still be able to perform? Or is it too calculated?

[Emma]

Computers can indeed play music better than people. Or at least more "pure". Just find download a midi and find a program to play it. If the program is halfway decent it will produce the music perfectly in tune and perfectly in time.

Music isn't supposed to be 'pure'. Machines have no concept of ad libitum; they don't interpret and modify the piece to suit the occasion, their thoughts and emotions and those of the audience, other pieces in the set, and so on. While their technical ability can surpass humans, they can't truly perform music.

What IcyTea says. Music isn't just a babble of notes that sounds nice, it's a performance. And I highly doubt that a machine, unless we manage to perfectly replicate human emotions, will ever be able to perform.

EDIT: Ninja'd but I'm not going to edit this as the point still stands.

[Arx]

Computers can indeed play music better than people. Or at least more "pure". Just find download a midi and find a program to play it. If the program is halfway decent it will produce the music perfectly in tune and perfectly in time.

Music isn't supposed to be 'pure'. Machines have no concept of ad libitum; they don't interpret and modify the piece to suit the occasion, their thoughts and emotions and those of the audience, other pieces in the set, and so on. While their technical ability can surpass humans, they can't truly perform music.

Plus one. I'd rather listen to a good pianist perform a piece on a slightly imperfect grand than listen to it performed mechanically perfectly by a computer. It has far more character.

[Adragis]

Why are humans saying 'we should wipe out humanity'
what

[King Kitteh]

snip

I guess I didn't see a reason for him to be offended. It was only theoretical discussion, and he took the offense on behalf of the entire human race (how generous). The fact that it insults me as a human too kind of changed the circumstances.

Regardless, I am sorry for the misery I may have caused Baffler.



Literally worse than Hilter in theory.



I'm not a depressed nihilist, I'm a depressed epistomological solipsist.
I did later explain that all I want is to be happy. I don't need the world to be super efficient, it's fine clunking along as it is.

[IcyTea31]

Computers can indeed play music better than people. Or at least more "pure". Just find download a midi and find a program to play it. If the program is halfway decent it will produce the music perfectly in tune and perfectly in time.

Music isn't supposed to be 'pure'. Machines have no concept of ad libitum; they don't interpret and modify the piece to suit the occasion, their thoughts and emotions and those of the audience, other pieces in the set, and so on. While their technical ability can surpass humans, they can't truly perform music.

Interesting, but what if we had a machine that indeed could modify and interpret a piece for an occasion, that experienced emotion and though, that was able to perform!

Of course, the idea I'm getting to here is that; humans are themselves machines. Albeit flesh, organic and extremely complicated. People will deny this, saying human and mechanical machine are too different.

But what if we machined our own human? We produce people in a lab through artificial surrogates, modify the DNA as to create a human that would be the perfect musician!

Would that person still be able to perform? Or is it too calculated?

The post I quoted has you imply that currently available technology could do it. With future tech, certainly, but at that point we are creating actual life, not just machines simulating it. Still, a created 'perfect' musician would likely have a different worldview compared to an 'imperfect' naturally formed one, making their performances very different, and good in their own ways.

Music has no single 'perfect' form, which is why machines can only ever hope to become equal in performance to humans, not above them.

[Orange Wizard]

I am sorry for the misery I may have caused Baffler.

It did come across like you were saying that people, currently, in reality, are of little value. Perhaps work on your phrasing in future.

[King Kitteh]

It's getting late guys, and I have a test tomorrow. It was nice discussing all this with you.

Just so you don't have any misconceptions. No I would not create a society of just machines and then murder all people. I just like discussing possibilities of dystopias and some existential questions as well. I am not Hitler reincarnated and I do not have a secret human testing facility in my basement. Yes, I do have emotions. No, I am not here to terminate you.

IcyTea31, I agree with you on music. I do not think there is a formula for the perfect song, and the lack of one is perhaps what makes it art.
(Although traditional art often did often follow a formula)


Sweet dreams, hope the trans-humanists don't bite!

[King Kitteh]

I am sorry for the misery I may have caused Baffler.

It did come across like you were saying that people, currently, in reality, are of little value. Perhaps work on your phrasing in future.

Oh, of course not. It was more so that they ARE valuable commodities, but in the future we may have created a machine that can do our tasks better. Thus making us obsolete.

Now I can see how that would have been offensive, to think of people that have suffered and died and to say that they are pointless is quite offensive.

[Putnam]

Computers can indeed play music better than people. Or at least more "pure". Just find download a midi and find a program to play it. If the program is halfway decent it will produce the music perfectly in tune and perfectly in time.

Music isn't supposed to be 'pure'. Machines have no concept of ad libitum; they don't interpret and modify the piece to suit the occasion, their thoughts and emotions and those of the audience, other pieces in the set, and so on. While their technical ability can surpass humans, they can't truly perform music.

What IcyTea says. Music isn't just a babble of notes that sounds nice, it's a performance. And I highly doubt that a machine, unless we manage to perfectly replicate human emotions, will ever be able to perform.

EDIT: Ninja'd but I'm not going to edit this as the point still stands.

yeah, all those composers are skilless hacks, music is only music when performed, composition is literally nothing

[Rolan7]

I am sorry for the misery I may have caused Baffler.

It did come across like you were saying that people, currently, in reality, are of little value. Perhaps work on your phrasing in future.

I can't stand when people argue for inefficiency to preserve "jobs".  The goal should be to share the benefits of technology fairly, not to hobble ourselves so that nobody can benefit unfairly.

If an office avoids financially beneficial technology so it "can" (has to) keep employees, that's just condescension.  They might as well be breaking rocks with hammers (or without hammers, then even more can be employeed!)

There are tons of things humans can do which can't be automated yet.  Manual arithmetic, scribing documents, steel-driving, many things are just cheaper and better when done by machines.

The real problem is never that we're doing things easier and better, it's that the benefits are being reaped by those already on top.  Because they're on top, so they get to decide.  Instead we should be getting more time off, better compensation, living wage, and eventually going post-scarcity altogether.  In a high technology & efficiency society, socialism actually works and is arguably necessary...

But I'm sleepy.  Sober, but up very late working.  I should write better scripts.