Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world to Showerthoughts@lemmy.world · 4 days agoAfter they kill Wikipedia history will be AI hallucinations.message-squaremessage-square63fedilinkarrow-up1396arrow-down112
arrow-up1384arrow-down1message-squareAfter they kill Wikipedia history will be AI hallucinations.Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world to Showerthoughts@lemmy.world · 4 days agomessage-square63fedilink
minus-squareseeigel@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down4·2 days agoWhy does it have to be dictated? People can freely organize in a democratic way. The problem is that people may join just because it is better, without fully supporting the respect towards others that is needed in such a system.
minus-squarebane_killgrind@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·2 days agoThings don’t happen that way. “Can, may, could” means that there will be pockets of people that don’t subscribe to the ideology and undermine it.
minus-squareseeigel@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down2·2 days agoThat’s the challenge. I still believe that it is possible.
minus-squarebane_killgrind@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 days agoAlright, thanks for confirming my opinion.
minus-squareseeigel@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down2·2 days agoYou are welcome. What’s your opinion if you don’t mind me asking?
minus-squarebane_killgrind@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 days ago That’s a very uneducated take, and shows that you don’t understand how access to information can be changed, and modeled to elicit certain outcomes.
minus-squareseeigel@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·2 days agoI was arguing that history is not needed when we have access to all experiences so we can ignore history if it is tainted. You say that relying on wrong history is dangerous and in the original comment, you say that well cited information is essential. There is no real contradiction but you have shown how access to information can be changed, or framed, and modeled to elicit certain outcomes.
minus-squarebane_killgrind@slrpnk.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 days agoDefine “tainted”, “wrong”(your word I never used that word) and how the context of history is not required to detect such things. Define what we know in a way that doesn’t have a historical basis.
minus-squareseeigel@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1arrow-down1·2 days agoHow does science know if something is true, with experiments.
Why does it have to be dictated? People can freely organize in a democratic way.
The problem is that people may join just because it is better, without fully supporting the respect towards others that is needed in such a system.
Things don’t happen that way. “Can, may, could” means that there will be pockets of people that don’t subscribe to the ideology and undermine it.
That’s the challenge. I still believe that it is possible.
Alright, thanks for confirming my opinion.
You are welcome.
What’s your opinion if you don’t mind me asking?
I was arguing that history is not needed when we have access to all experiences so we can ignore history if it is tainted.
You say that relying on wrong history is dangerous and in the original comment, you say that well cited information is essential.
There is no real contradiction but you have shown how access to information can be changed, or framed, and modeled to elicit certain outcomes.
Define “tainted”, “wrong”(your word I never used that word) and how the context of history is not required to detect such things.
Define what we know in a way that doesn’t have a historical basis.
How does science know if something is true, with experiments.