Watching this interview just gladdens me even more that our high school debate and speech team hosted you for a discussion on *The Case Against Education* last year (https://youtu.be/ILX9fIJvR8g?t=420). Leading up to your visit, a few teachers told their classes—many of which contained team members—that you should not be allowed on campus due to the violence against the LGBTQ+ and female communities you were guilty of, as evidenced by your essay on the "LGBT Explosion" and your book *Don't Be A Feminist".
I talked with these teachers after the event, wanting to understand their concerns and positions better. The thing that struck me most is that none of them had actually read the essay or book in question — their objections to your presence were based on what they had heard. They also refused to engage in the discussion I hoped for. One of them actually attended the event, but never took the opportunity to ask a question. One accused you of "gaslighting" the attendees with your expertise and greater knowledge! Their objection was that it's unfair to put children alone in a room with an expert expressing opinions the children are ill-equipped to process and counter or explore themselves; the irony that this was coming from a public school teacher is overwhelming.
Your skepticism and willingness to engage others who question your positions and data is the model I hoped my debaters would consider for themselves.
To your point about social desirability bias: what if AI solves a bunch of problems but we just refuse to listen to it because we don't like the answers.
I find it humorous thinking about car dealerships replacing human salespeople with robots. Its so much easier to tell a robot to stick it where the sun doesn't shine than a human being given our social nature. Robots as sales people I think are going to be about as effect as a much cheaper billboard, and we haven't replaced all sales labor with billboards yet. So I'm not sure why robots would be any better. Also its the same reason why its easy for us to mass murder NPC's in video games, but the overwhelming majority of human beings wouldn't even have the thought of killing another person cross their mind. Honestly I think full sensory immersion VR if possible will actually be the most labor destructive force our species will ever see, and might answer the fermi paradox. Taking a page out of Gad Saad, most of the junk we consume revolves around sexual signaling and status signaling. If you get VR that is as real as this world there goes 99.9% of female sexual capital (assuming a pornographic function, which I'm assuming would be the first thing they do with the tech, much less do it at some point) and subsequently every purchase that revolves around that collapses with it (at least insofar as its men trying to have sexual access to women). It also hollows out virtually every adrenaline activity (amusement parks, skydiving, skiing, motocross ect...), probably travel and leisure too: why go to Jamaica and spend all that money running the risk of rainy weather when you can go to simulated Jamaica where it never rains, the water is always more translucent, and algae never blooms ect?
You mention paying to avoid annoying YouTube ads. Brave browser blocks YouTube ads for free. There are also browser extensions that do this for other browsers.
Watching this interview just gladdens me even more that our high school debate and speech team hosted you for a discussion on *The Case Against Education* last year (https://youtu.be/ILX9fIJvR8g?t=420). Leading up to your visit, a few teachers told their classes—many of which contained team members—that you should not be allowed on campus due to the violence against the LGBTQ+ and female communities you were guilty of, as evidenced by your essay on the "LGBT Explosion" and your book *Don't Be A Feminist".
I talked with these teachers after the event, wanting to understand their concerns and positions better. The thing that struck me most is that none of them had actually read the essay or book in question — their objections to your presence were based on what they had heard. They also refused to engage in the discussion I hoped for. One of them actually attended the event, but never took the opportunity to ask a question. One accused you of "gaslighting" the attendees with your expertise and greater knowledge! Their objection was that it's unfair to put children alone in a room with an expert expressing opinions the children are ill-equipped to process and counter or explore themselves; the irony that this was coming from a public school teacher is overwhelming.
Your skepticism and willingness to engage others who question your positions and data is the model I hoped my debaters would consider for themselves.
To your point about social desirability bias: what if AI solves a bunch of problems but we just refuse to listen to it because we don't like the answers.
I find it humorous thinking about car dealerships replacing human salespeople with robots. Its so much easier to tell a robot to stick it where the sun doesn't shine than a human being given our social nature. Robots as sales people I think are going to be about as effect as a much cheaper billboard, and we haven't replaced all sales labor with billboards yet. So I'm not sure why robots would be any better. Also its the same reason why its easy for us to mass murder NPC's in video games, but the overwhelming majority of human beings wouldn't even have the thought of killing another person cross their mind. Honestly I think full sensory immersion VR if possible will actually be the most labor destructive force our species will ever see, and might answer the fermi paradox. Taking a page out of Gad Saad, most of the junk we consume revolves around sexual signaling and status signaling. If you get VR that is as real as this world there goes 99.9% of female sexual capital (assuming a pornographic function, which I'm assuming would be the first thing they do with the tech, much less do it at some point) and subsequently every purchase that revolves around that collapses with it (at least insofar as its men trying to have sexual access to women). It also hollows out virtually every adrenaline activity (amusement parks, skydiving, skiing, motocross ect...), probably travel and leisure too: why go to Jamaica and spend all that money running the risk of rainy weather when you can go to simulated Jamaica where it never rains, the water is always more translucent, and algae never blooms ect?
You mention paying to avoid annoying YouTube ads. Brave browser blocks YouTube ads for free. There are also browser extensions that do this for other browsers.
It was a cool interview, but about a lot more than AI.