South African Covid-19 News and Discussions 3

neoprema

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Messages
7,886
That means you are happy to have your speech censored, in case it supports some nutcase others don't agree with , who might win an election.

That also means you will gladly give up your freedoms and allow others to decide where you can go, who you can see, when you must not and what you must not buy. When you are allowed to work, to support your family, when you are not; also when you are not allowed to see you dying relatives. You will also willingly give up control over your body and allow others to decide what foreign bodies go into it.

All for some illness that, on a global scale, affects so few
Oh, yes I think humans need to have some kind of control of their freedoms. The golden question is who can enforce it. Because other humans are also not good at enforcing restrictions for our own good.
Take I, Robot by Asimov. VIKI the AI is viewed as the bad entity, when in fact she was just doing what we all wanted - maintain peace and make humans happy. To do that, meant restricting certain freedoms, many of which are just manifestations of selfish choice that does little good for anyone else.
 

Geoff.D

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
25,253
Oh, yes I think humans need to have some kind of control of their freedoms. The golden question is who can enforce it. Because other humans are also not good at enforcing restrictions for our own good.
Take I, Robot by Asimov. VIKI the AI is viewed as the bad entity, when in fact she was just doing what we all wanted - maintain peace and make humans happy. To do that, meant restricting certain freedoms, many of which are just manifestations of selfish choice that does little good for anyone else.
The crappy movie or the original story?
 

Paulsie

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2020
Messages
3,186
Oh, yes I think humans need to have some kind of control of their freedoms. The golden question is who can enforce it. Because other humans are also not good at enforcing restrictions for our own good.
Take I, Robot by Asimov. VIKI the AI is viewed as the bad entity, when in fact she was just doing what we all wanted - maintain peace and make humans happy. To do that, meant restricting certain freedoms, many of which are just manifestations of selfish choice that does little good for anyone else.
With all due respect, that's why you get so many tyrants, dictators and useless governments around the world, ruling for eons on end.

Show people a boogeyman, promise to protect them and they will bend over backwards for you.
 

neoprema

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2016
Messages
7,886
With all due respect, that's why you get so many tyrants, dictators and useless governments around the world, ruling for eons on end.

Show people a boogeyman, promise to protect them and they will bend over backwards for you.
"The golden question is who can enforce it. Because other humans are also not good at enforcing restrictions for our own good."
^
 

noxibox

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
22,067
Oh, yes I think humans need to have some kind of control of their freedoms. The golden question is who can enforce it. Because other humans are also not good at enforcing restrictions for our own good.
That's why it is never absolute.

Take I, Robot by Asimov. VIKI the AI is viewed as the bad entity, when in fact she was just doing what we all wanted - maintain peace and make humans happy.
Aldous Huxley and some others wrote good books on that, and why it is ultimately bad for us.

To do that, meant restricting certain freedoms, many of which are just manifestations of selfish choice that does little good for anyone else.
So other's selfish requirements get preference?
 

Brian_G

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
8,461
"The golden question is who can enforce it. Because other humans are also not good at enforcing restrictions for our own good."
^
In the past, when there's been better governance in a few places it's because there's been genuine caring. To some degree anyway, nobody in politics is a saint last I heard ;- )

So we're back to the old saying; absolute power corrupts absolutely. We've allowed huge political and business power concerns to get an untamed foothold. For years already there's been an attitude among them when caught out that it's considered maybe reasonable to lie and manipulate because others like them do.

How do we get back to good basics? Can we strip away the power if it's controlling us?
 

noxibox

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
22,067
"The golden question is who can enforce it. Because other humans are also not good at enforcing restrictions for our own good."
^
It's generally not your job to put restrictions on another person for their own good. There are only specific exceptions, like children or someone else in your care who meets very strict criteria.

Otherwise the logical extension of the tyranny you propose is the banning of all risky activities. And the ultimate conclusion of the meaning of risky will be anything that has even the remotest possibility of causing the slightest bit of harm. The latter word will itself take on an ever expanding meaning. This isn't even hypothesis, because we've already witnessed exactly this happening in practice.

Humans do an imperfect job of figuring out how to negotiate freedoms and figure out where the boundaries are, when imposition on others is over the line. Any artificial intelligence capable of handling making such decisions will necessarily make incorrect decisions. If it is trying to make decisions for us based on our own good it will necessarily make the wrong choice often. In fact you can't in general make humans happy and protect them from doing things that are not good for them at the same time.
 

noxibox

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
22,067
In the past, when there's been better governance in a few places it's because there's been genuine caring. To some degree anyway, nobody in politics is a saint last I heard ;- )

So we're back to the old saying; absolute power corrupts absolutely. We've allowed huge political and business power concerns to get an untamed foothold. For years already there's been an attitude among them when caught out that it's considered maybe reasonable to lie and manipulate because others like them do.

How do we get back to good basics? Can we strip away the power if it's controlling us?
If there was a period when they did not have that hold on power it was very brief. Historically those with money and those constituting the state, usually the same people, had effectively unlimited power. In general corruption and covering for each other was the norm rather than the exception.
 

Brian_G

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
8,461
Any artificial intelligence capable of handling making such decisions will necessarily make incorrect decisions. If it is trying to make decisions for us based on our own good it will necessarily make the wrong choice often.
Can AI ever be taught to care? Can't see how, maybe one day they can give it consciousness but it's still not living.
If there was a period when they did not have that hold on power it was very brief. Historically those with money and those constituting the state, usually the same people, had effectively unlimited power. In general corruption and covering for each other was the norm rather than the exception.
There probably was never any pure period, not in our concept of history anyway, but there's at least been periods when it was for lack of better term "civil".
 

noxibox

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
22,067
Are you all just seeing that in informal areas, or is it widespread? In Jo'burg seeing it "everywhere" (where I go anyway).
It's not all over. People are staying apart in queues. Majority of shops require sanitising. Smaller shops enforce wearing masks. Places like supermarkets less so due to size, but it is typically people pulling the mask off their nose so they can breathe in the heat rather than walking around with no mask at all.

In the street most people don't wear masks, but that's to be expected when walking around outside. As temperatures go up they're generally going to be worn less, especially outdoors.

In Wynberg it was inside shops, apartment block and such. Even the chicken licken didn't care much if you had a mask on or not.
Central Wynberg in Cape Town is more like a township.
 

noxibox

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
22,067
Can AI ever be taught to care? Can't see how, maybe one day they can give it consciousness but it's still not living.
I don't know, but AI making decisions based on incomplete and fuzzy information, as humans do, must also make mistakes.

There probably was never any pure period, not in our concept of history anyway, but there's at least been periods when it was for lack of better term "civil".
That's why I say brief. It doesn't last long even if it does come into existence.
 

noxibox

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
22,067
So seems like the more you wear a face mask, the more of a chance of getting infected
Most were wearing masks, so I would not read that into it. It could indicate that the masks don't help. They pretty much say in the text of the study they don't know for sure.

I do find it interesting that gyms, one of the things that were panicked over, appear to not be such major sources of infection as was presumed.
 

noxibox

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
22,067
I’ll gladly go through body scanners anytime if it keeps some whack job from blowing my plane up.
Beyond Security Theater

Those scanners cannot prevent someone from hijacking the aeroplane you're on and bringing it down. A determined lone individual could do it with some effort. A well-resourced team could do it more easily. But aeroplanes aside you could still be killed in an attack on the street, a bus, a building. It's not scanners that are preventing it from happening.
 

Paulsie

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2020
Messages
3,186
In the past, when there's been better governance in a few places it's because there's been genuine caring. To some degree anyway, nobody in politics is a saint last I heard ;- )

So we're back to the old saying; absolute power corrupts absolutely. We've allowed huge political and business power concerns to get an untamed foothold. For years already there's been an attitude among them when caught out that it's considered maybe reasonable to lie and manipulate because others like them do.

How do we get back to good basics? Can we strip away the power if it's controlling us?
Whatever happened to antitrust laws around the world??

I mean, you have 3 companies (FAG) controlling all online media, you have 3-4 corporations controlling 90% of global media, you have mickey mouse economy propped up by bailouts while 40% of global population cannot meet their cost of living without going into debt, you have lobbies controlling laws and regulations etc etc.

Unless you ask the French how they did it in 1800's (pitchforks and all), we don't stand a chance
 

Brian_G

Executive Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2020
Messages
8,461
*click*
This is a recording, I've tried to reach escape velocity from this forum, still trying.....

Unless you ask the French how they did it in 1800's (pitchforks and all), we don't stand a chance
I'm an optimist, we'll get through this ;- )
 
Top