[notbuyingit]

Yes, and the fact that this person feels so clearly comfortable acting as if there's a single moral standard for all of humanity...

Let's just say, there's enough fundamentals missing that my pessimism about the folks pushing AI isn't yet pessimistic enough.

Ha, oh boy there was a dig at "woke" in there too, but the GP was smart enough to not use that word. Gimme a break, these folks that act like they understand the world and their opinion is some universally-true common denominator are seriously out of touch.

Edit:

> m a member of several protected classes and I grew up in "what doesn't hurt you makes you stronger".

My dad beat me and I came out good. You can't make this shit up. I have friends that killed themselves as queer teens. Guess they weren't strong enough.

[salad-tycoon]

I read your comment as rather angry and more of an emotional reaction to what you perceive to be “woke” and possibly “gay hater” and etc, if GP means the guy who is more hands off approach basically he is saying “I don’t want to tell people how to think, there are a lot of different view points and I in my limited upbringing and experience cannot possibly fathom being the final arbitrator” at least that’s my interpretation. I mean it seems reasonable right? Or at least you can see some merits of this thought?

[notbuyingit]

Let me be clear, those were bonuses that helped fill in gaps. I've been seeing through the muck since before gamergate had a name and I'm good at reading between the lines.

The real issue is someone acting like they're too anti-woke to encode morality rules into their ai... After listing morality rules.

It's abject hubris, "oh of course my morals are the universal standard".

The fact that they cast side-eye on other people expressing ideas about social norms, or acting like unregulated free speech is unlimitedly good, and the cluelessness about moral relativism/absolutism, well, like I said, it completes a picture.