David RadcliffeMay God grant me the confidence of a large language model.
Steven Hugg@davidradcliffe "I know I've made some very poor decisions recently, but I've still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in the mission."
Tom Ruen@sehugg @davidradcliffe Haha! I also tested the Trolley problem as a story, and the character always unsentimentally saves the lives of the many over the few, no matter who they are, even 5 pigeons need to be saved at the cost of one's own baby boy.
Erika@tomruen If we are thinking logically like computers do, then that is the right answer though. We only disagree because humans tend to value human lives over other animals. Computers aren't selfish like we are.
@opponent019 I'd disagree with your assessment of what is logical, what is right, and what is selfish. Saying "needs of the many outweigh needs of the few" is a rule-of-thumb, not a truth. But I suppose I agree in the senses of a thought experiment.
Like in June 2020, I'd suggest young people burn down their parents homes to express solidarity with BLM, since parents had insurance so no harm done. I couldn't get them to see that was equivalent to burning down businesses to protest injustice.
Like in June 2020, I'd suggest young people burn down their parents homes to express solidarity with BLM, since parents had insurance so no harm done. I couldn't get them to see that was equivalent to burning down businesses to protest injustice.
@opponent019 By the logic of "lesser harm" abortion doctors should be murdered if you're prolife, because you're saving the many at the cost of a few. There's no end of potential evil when you make yourself alone the decider on what is logical, what is right, what is selfish. You could murder anyone who eats meat, to try to save animals. You can be the unibomber who saw humanity as a cancer that needed to be stopped with violence.
@tomruen
And this is why computers should never make decisions, just labour. The answer of saving the pigeons is correct, the thought of getting rid of humanity to save the planet and the rest of its species is logically correct, but we humans of course don't agree and wouldn't want that.
And this is why computers should never make decisions, just labour. The answer of saving the pigeons is correct, the thought of getting rid of humanity to save the planet and the rest of its species is logically correct, but we humans of course don't agree and wouldn't want that.