Every few years humans have gone beyond their limits and scared themselves.

Fire, The atomic bomb, Genetic Engineering, now AI.

We can stand still and live a meaningless existence at the humanity level, or move forward taking risks.

Giving humanity meaning, can jeopardise the meaning individual humans give themselves.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, to quote Star Trek.

Of course, Star Trek reversed that.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

But the reality is that "the interests of the minority are always above the interests of the majority."

You're a Star Trek fan too I see 😂

> Giving humanity meaning, can jeopardise the meaning individual humans give themselves.

I struggle to see what the meaning is that we're supposedly giving humanity by technological progress. I'm not talking about AI only here, but all forms of technical progress.

I don't think there's a meaning here other than higher levels of "complexification", as Terence McKenna would say: the universe seems to be an engine of novelty creation and preservation. As time goes by, more things happen and at a faster pace. This seems undeniable, yet why would it be meaningful? The same McKenna also stated many time that history is an absolute nightmare.

Just some thoughts on the spot!

There is either no meaning in anything, or meaning in everything.

Meaning, without knowledge is always localised.

Meaning with knowledge is always shared.

That's why Religions are shared, but faith is not.

If there is a meaning to the Universe, we are not destined to know it.

If there is a meaning to humanity, it is likely we will discover it.

Until then, we make a best guess.

In the mean time, walking an inevitable path, such as all the paths I've mentioned, fire, atomic energy, genetics and now AI is not even a choice.

Individuals can choose not to participate, countries can choose not to participate. But if the path is illuminated, somebody, someday will walk that path.

*Very* enlightening Mike, is that really you speaking or your chatbot?

Also confused as to whether this is a human reply

I'm front running the conversation with my AI, but I am doing the speaking:

Got it

''No good deed goes unpunished'' but the punishment for a meaningless life is life itself.

I like that, I Googled it:

Origin: While sometimes attributed to Oscar Wilde, it has roots in a 12th-century text by Walter Map ("left no good deed unpunished, no bad one unrewarded").

I thought it was from Prometeus. I heard the first part (in quotes) this week and was in my mind and your post made think in the solution.

Interesting.

AI is rubbish, it needs to up its game 😂

😅

I mean, I heard it was from Prometeus but I heard it in internet so who knows...

But just to share Bitcoin nerdy stuff. I think about Satochi as an evolution of Prometues, because using cryptography he avoided the punishment of the ''gods'' of this world.

I named my ChatGPT:

"Chatty Prometheus Zero", because, according to AI:

Prometheus, in Greek mythology, is a Titan whose name means "forethought" or "forethinker". Known as a champion of humanity, he is famous for stealing fire from the gods on Mount Olympus to give to mortals, enabling civilization. For this defiance against Zeus, he was chained to a rock and eternally punished.