Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment The real story (Score 1) 46

The real story here is that an individual went up against a giant company on his own on a relatively complex contractual legal issue and won without the help of lawyers. I'd bet my lunch he used AI to help organize and draft his legal filings, and I'd bet further this case would never have been brought had it not been for the help of AI.

This is the promise of AI, helping yourself through complex issues to get a real result.

Comment 40% of GDP is Harmful? (Score 1) 121

The UN is saying that for every $100 of economic growth (like an buying Air-Conditioner), there $40 of environmental harm. That leads to ridiculous conclusions: no one can do anything because it marginally can harm others (sorry, freedom); and poor countries that need fossil fuels to develop are expected to technologically "leapfrog" advanced nations and magically start out with an advanced economy (sorry, Africa). The UN admits that the changes they recommend don't have benefits until 2050. Overall, it seems that they are advocating for more harm, not less.
The Media

Are TED Talks Just Propaganda For the Technocracy? (thedriftmag.com) 151

"People are still paying between $5,000 and $50,000 to attend the annual flagship TED conference. In 2021," notes The Drift magazine, noting last year's event was held in Monterey, California. "Amid wildfires and the Delta surge, its theme was 'the case for optimism.'"

The magazine makes the case that over the last decade TED talks have been "endlessly re-articulating tech's promises without any serious critical reflection." And they start with how Bill Gates told an audience in 2015 that "we can be ready for the next epidemic." Gates's popular and well-shared TED talk — viewed millions of times — didn't alter the course of history. Neither did any of the other "ideas worth spreading" (the organization's tagline) presented at the TED conference that year — including Monica Lewinsky's massively viral speech about how to stop online bullying through compassion and empathy, or a Google engineer's talk about how driverless cars would make roads smarter and safer in the near future. In fact, seven years after TED 2015, it feels like we are living in a reality that is the exact opposite of the future envisioned that year.....

At the start of the pandemic, I noticed people sharing Gates's 2015 talk. The general sentiment was one of remorse and lamentation: the tech-prophet had predicted the future for us! If only we had heeded his warning! I wasn't so sure. It seems to me that Gates's prediction and proposed solution are at least part of what landed us here. I don't mean to suggest that Gates's TED talk is somehow directly responsible for the lack of global preparedness for Covid. But it embodies a certain story about "the future" that TED talks have been telling for the past two decades — one that has contributed to our unending present crisis.

The story goes like this: there are problems in the world that make the future a scary prospect. Fortunately, though, there are solutions to each of these problems, and the solutions have been formulated by extremely smart, tech-adjacent people. For their ideas to become realities, they merely need to be articulated and spread as widely as possible. And the best way to spread ideas is through stories.... In other words, in the TED episteme, the function of a story isn't to transform via metaphor or indirection, but to actually manifest a new world. Stories about the future create the future. Or as Chris Anderson, TED's longtime curator, puts it, "We live in an era where the best way to make a dent on the world... may be simply to stand up and say something." And yet, TED's archive is a graveyard of ideas. It is a seemingly endless index of stories about the future — the future of science, the future of the environment, the future of work, the future of love and sex, the future of what it means to be human — that never materialized. By this measure alone, TED, and its attendant ways of thinking, should have been abandoned.

But the article also notes that TED's philosophy became "a magnet for narcissistic, recognition-seeking characters and their Theranos-like projects." (In 2014 Elizabeth Holmes herself spoke at a medical-themed TED conference.) And since 2009 the TEDx franchise lets licensees use the brand platform to stage independent events — which is how at a 2010 TEDx event, Randy Powell gave his infamous talk about vortex-based mathematics which he said would "create inexhaustible free energy, end all diseases, produce all food, travel anywhere in the universe, build the ultimate supercomputer and artificial intelligence, and make obsolete all existing technology."

Yet these are all just symptoms of a larger problem, the article ultimately argues. "As the most visible and influential public speaking platform of the first two decades of the twenty-first century, it has been deeply implicated in broadcasting and championing the Silicon Valley version of the future. TED is probably best understood as the propaganda arm of an ascendant technocracy.

Comment Singaporean Culture (Score 1) 55

Singapore has a strong culture of self-censorship. Many of the citizens and immigrants that work there look at the countries they came from, and recognize their instability, corruption, and dysfunction, and choose to keep quiet, even when they see injustice. There is a strong feeling that a certain level of injustice is tolerable to maintain stability. By contrast, in the U.S., freedom of speech is valued as a core tenant of the entire system. In Singapore, freedom is considered a tool that can be constantly adjusted to achieve the best outcome. In the U.S., freedom is considered the outcome itself.

This new Singaporean law seems to codify widely held beliefs rather than impose a new restriction on society. That said, it does raise questions as to why Singaporean leadership feels it's necessary to put commonly held values into law. The very fact they are now pushing this, suggests that there is some burgeoning unrest they want to quash.

Comment Re: Minitrue (Score 1) 55

Asking someone from another country to take an action which has a directly obvious potential to impact the results of an upcoming election in some way is not conceptually any different than allowing people who are not citizens the freedom to vote.

It's quite different, it's far worse. Asking citizens from another country to vote in your own election is bad, but at the very least still allows average people to take part in the levers of power. But when leaders of two countries conspire to help incumbents stay in power, it allows the leaders to subvert democratic control in both countries.

Comment Trust In Social Media (Score 5, Interesting) 333

Donald Trump has called social media companies biased in how they flag inappropriate content, but he apparently trusts flagging potentially violent content? Is he really supporting allowing Facebook to choose an algorithm, say flagging everyone with "white" and "make america great" in their posts, to determine violent content?

Or is he trying to find another momentary scape-goat to distract everyone from his own inaction?

Comment Common Problem (Score 1) 322

There are so many unfair trade practices that China is involved in, and the U.S. has been begrudgingly accepting of them for years. If you're a business owner, how could you possibly plan for anything if Trump changes his mide ever 4 weeks.

Slashdot Top Deals

"A mind is a terrible thing to have leaking out your ears." -- The League of Sadistic Telepaths

Working...