Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by coldtea 22 days ago
>“Humans are valuable.” You can just say it. As a human yourself, I advise you to. You do not need to qualify it. This is a robust1 statement that is not conditional on a point-in-time snapshot of the leading frontier model’s score on some recent benchmark.

Nope, it very much is conditional to it, as it's conditional to utility.

The OP is not going to come an pay someone who can't get a job and has zero market value due to AI.

So this "a human is (intristically) valuable" is just a meaningless pat on the back, while the human is devalued.

2 comments

Society would certainly be better without people who judge others by their market value.
Yes, but would also be better if everybody got a free pony with supplies for life or met true love, etc.
Is it your contention that the vast majority of people only value others in terms of their economic value?
My contention, which I stated quite clearly is that saying otherwise while not paying them, not giving them work, etc, and leaving them to rot, is an empty platitude.

"Go die homeless, but remember, you have intrisic value just for being human".

Why does saying "humans have intrinsic value" put an obligation on a person to entirely fix society's problems? It's a really walrus-y "so you critique society yet participate in it, huh, curious" way to engage with the question. "Oh, if you think humans are so great, why haven't you helped every human?" just dodges the point the original article is making.

I think insinuating that OP is engaging in empty platitudes because they expressed a hopeful philosophical position rather than a cynical one is reading their work in bad faith.

Fully agreed.
> The OP is not going to come a pay someone who can't get a job and has zero market value due to AI.

If only there was a safety net that would help struggling humans, while trillion (just imagine the numbers) dollar companies have record high earnings. But that’s too much “socialism”, or harshhhtfu communism.