deleted by creator

My response here is targeted at the other people replying to this message.

I am extremely distressed at the amount of people justifying deadnaming and upvoting the comments justifying deadnaming compared to the amount of upvotes on this comment.

Deadnaming someone because it’s convenient for you is not a good justification.

It is very upsetting for the grand majority of trans people to be referred to by their deadnames. You should not do it unless specifically you are told that it’s okay! Please listen to trans people when they say that this is upsetting and that you should not do this.

Edit: Adding the following:

A simple search for “Emily Young LTT” is all you need to find out who she is anyway? So it reiterate the original comment, there is no NEED for the deadnaming. There is only your comfort and convenience.

I’m not an expert on longtermarism but I have read William McAskills “What we owe the future”.

The quote highlighted about AI is a clear demonstration on how longtermarism is being misappropriated. It describes a “rush” when the impression I got from McAskills book is that AI ethics needs to be very carefully discussed and that rushing into it is the opposite of what longtermists should do. To try and describe it briefly, this is because AI presents the risk of what McAskill describes as “value lock-in” where our current society’s values will continue long into the future, or the values that will persevere into the future will be decided by the few people who create the first generative AI.

In reality, people like Musk probably see AI as a means to push what they believe are the correct moral values long into the future. Which is terrifying…

This is why AI ethics is extremely important. We are already seeing institutional prejudices our current society possesses being perpetuated by AI, such as racism, sexism, etc. This is why when I saw that Microsoft/OpenAI was scrapping it’s AI ethics team that I was absolutely horrified…

The “rush” to produce AI is a problem with Capitalism, not longtermarism. There is a rush to create the first generative AI not because it will benefit society but because it will make buttloads of money.

deleted by creator

I’m shocked at the amount of people in the replies here whose response to this is basically “no, I won’t, because its convenient”.

It is widely known that this convenience comes at the price of poor working conditions for Amazon workers. Our consuming habits have a very real and tangible impact. The article linked covers this briefly:

Amazon warehouse workers spend their days picking and packing in million-square-foot warehouses where they face punishing productivity expectations, constant surveillance, high turnover, and serious injuries, for a starting wage of $15 an hour.

Of course there are many other negative impacts caused by this convenience which are also covered in the linked article.

I would rather inconvenience myself than buy something from Amazon at all if I can avoid it. I understand for a non-zero number of people, Amazon is their only option, but for those of us who have a choice I would encourage you to reconsider your consumption habits.

Edit: Adding clarity in some statements.

The problem of “AI” and all labor-saving technology in the last few centuries is not the technology itself but is actually Capitalism.

Yes, you are absolutely correct.

I have something to add to the arguments you have already presented in your post.

The problem with Capitalism is that in order to live you have to make an income. In order to make an income you have to be able to work.

AI, and in the future, robotics, presents an issue to people because it creates less jobs for people to work. And what are people meant to do if they cannot work and therefore cannot earn income? Capitalism requires jobs in order to be a successful system, at least for the common folk like us.

But, should this be the reason that we work? In order to live?

This is how it has always been done, we have to work in order to survive. Whether it was because we worked to procure food otherwise we would starve, or if it’s to work to earn an income to buy food otherwise we would starve.

As humans, we are seeing perhaps the first breaths of an era where we could no longer need to work in order to survive. AI and robotics is still in its infancy and it presents a great danger if it is handled incorrectly (which is currently is). Imagine a future where menial, repetitive tasks are automated and we can all live lives of comfort as in order to eat, we only need to exist. We can focus our time to working for the sake of working, because we find the work meaningful, because it enriches our lives, and because it helps others. A world where we can create art for the sake of creating art and not because we need to create art in order to eat.

I know I am speaking in ideals here, and the real world is different. Basically, what I am trying to say, is that the future I strive for cannot be a Capitalist one. The issue is not the technology, it’s Capitalism.

Customer service chatbots are useful for helping someone use natural language to find an answer that already exists in the documentation/FAQ. I imagine this must be useful for a non-zero number of people who find it difficult to troubleshoot issues using an FAQ.

Personally, my first port-of-call is always to go to the documentation/FAQ myself to look for the answer. I will only use a chat service if I cannot find the answer. So having a chatbot trying to suggest me solutions from the documentation is always very disruptive and annoying because it’s just forcing me to press “no this doesn’t answer my question” enough times until it actually connects me to a human… if I’m lucky.

I think there is value pursuing and researching the technology more. For the benefit of people who aren’t like me and struggle troubleshooting issues on their own. It can be useful for helping with routine queries and allows for existing customer service personnel focus on the more complex issues. As it stands at the moment almost every customer service chatbot I have encountered has been a negative experience for me.