EnthusiasticNature94 @ EnthusiasticNature94 @lemmy.blahaj.zone

Posts

5

Comments

59

Joined

4 mo. ago

Unfortunately, I don't even know what the argument is, so I'd need you to provide context.

I'm just trying to understand how irrational or aggressive Lemmy is towards women.

Thank you for describing the bear vs man thing to me. So it was basically a question posted on social media, and then the reactions to the question (and maybe others' comments) was divisive?

This.

I support AI, but I don't understand why AI bros are complicating things or making things all-or-nothing.

OpenAI had enough money to hire a hitman on one of their whistleblowers. They can afford to pay for content, lol.

How do you use it?

Exactly, imagine if we threw away the entire peer review process and made it about, "Well I have a PhD! Checkmate."

We'd descend into a dark age for science.

Nice, that's on my bucket list.

Experts often disagree.

If it were that easy, everything would be solved. We wouldn't need so much research or so many universities.

🧐

Where is this from? 🙏🏼😭

Now we gotta find the machines that can make both pet and human wet food and treats.

Oh no. 😭

Only teenagers? 😭

I agree with Dr. Jey McCreight on the science.

But for determining truth, both sides are wrong here.

Dunning-Kruger is bad, but so is credentialism and appeal to authority.

Many people with PhD's have had Dunning-Kruger. Someone else mentioned Ben Carson being great at neurosurgery, but not politics.

A PhD doesn't make you infallible.

I am saying this as someone who is taking graduate-level courses and will be pursuing my PhD. When I'm correct, it's not because my future PhD causes reality to magically conform to my opinions - it's because I rigorously looked at the evidence, logic, and formed my own conclusion that better aligns with reality.

Yeah, both sides are wrong here.

Dunning-Kruger is bad, but so is credentialism and appeal to authority.

So this is the manual that the bad tech support lines use. 😭

Technology isn't there yet. Try again in 20 years.

I'm not proposing anything specific, no. I said it was an example (and I even bolded the text).

I don't really have a stake in the specific example I gave, so I can't really comment much else on your critique of it.

So would ASL, yet here we are.

The education system is for schooling, not learning.

So would ASL, yet here we are.

The education system is for schooling, not learning.

This is a really good response. Thank you.

I think we can have both the benefits of democracy being decentralized and resistant to systemic manipulation, and of technocracy having some minimum bar to deter ignorant individuals from harming society. There are trade-offs for sure, but currently, we the people ultimately voted for someone who openly said he'd impose tariffs (among other things).

One potential example (among many, many possibilities) is a system where academic organizations and think tanks stake their reputation to nominate candidates, and then the people vote on them.

For example, let's say the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) nominates a pro-tariff candidate to manage economic policy. And then let's say the people end up voting for them. After the tariffs wreck the economy, the reputation of the Economic Policy Institute (EPI) will deteriorate considerably. In the next election, the people will vote the candidate out and ignore future EPI nominations.

Yeah, this is probably the main criticism of technocracies.

I personally advocate for a more decentralized version of technocracy. I don't really have stake in which decentralized system is best, but each decentralized system has at least some minimum bar to deter those who have absolutely no idea what they're doing from assuming power.