4 ms·

> There is nothing wrong with it Actually there is. People deal differently with the loss, but eventually they all get over it, because it is a natural proces

> There is nothing wrong with it Actually there is. People deal differently with the loss, but eventually they all get over it, because it is a natural process. A severe refusal to move on is not what one can call a good thing. Think about the people around you and the consequences it could have.

serf 7y ago
>Actually there is. statements of fact like that with regards to a fairly unexplored territory are worse than useless, they're damaging. By what criteria do we know that this is a 'severe refusal to move on'? Should we accuse people who peruse old photographs from their history of the same 'severe refusal'? Why can't this AI idea be just yet another tool at our disposal for memory recall and recollection? Why paint this as some mental ineptitude, rather than just an archival opportunity? Most stores of data have possible consequence by their mere existence. What's different here exactly? Would the idea be more palatable if, rather than the clickbait ideas of immortality, it was framed as a trained chatbot?
- walterstucco 7y ago
  > statements of fact like that with regards to a fairly unexplored territory are worse than useless, they're damaging. They are not. > Should we accuse people who peruse old photographs from their history of the same 'severe refusal'? Who said accuse? Remembering is one thing, trying to make them live after death is another entirely. "Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus" has a thing or two to say about it. "Seek happiness in tranquillity and avoid ambition" > Why can't this AI idea be just yet another tool at our disposal for memory recall and recollection? Because death is inevitable, not accepting it is detrimental for one's health and future relationships. > Why paint this as some mental ineptitude, rather than just an archival opportunity? Who said mental ineptitude? > Most stores of data have possible consequence by their mere existence. What's different here exactly? That, just like Frankenstein, this is "a deliberate decision" to obtain exactly that goal. It's not a side effect. But I agree, I would say the same thing for any other other project having similar objectives. > Would the idea be more palatable if, rather than the clickbait ideas of immortality, it was framed as a trained chatbot? Psychologists are mostly that, but they can actually help.

serf 7y ago

>Actually there is. statements of fact like that with regards to a fairly unexplored territory are worse than useless, they're damaging. By what criteria do we know that this is a 'severe refusal to move on'? Should we accuse people who peruse old photographs from their history of the same 'severe refusal'? Why can't this AI idea be just yet another tool at our disposal for memory recall and recollection? Why paint this as some mental ineptitude, rather than just an archival opportunity? Most stores of data have possible consequence by their mere existence. What's different here exactly? Would the idea be more palatable if, rather than the clickbait ideas of immortality, it was framed as a trained chatbot?

walterstucco 7y ago
> statements of fact like that with regards to a fairly unexplored territory are worse than useless, they're damaging. They are not. > Should we accuse people who peruse old photographs from their history of the same 'severe refusal'? Who said accuse? Remembering is one thing, trying to make them live after death is another entirely. "Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus" has a thing or two to say about it. "Seek happiness in tranquillity and avoid ambition" > Why can't this AI idea be just yet another tool at our disposal for memory recall and recollection? Because death is inevitable, not accepting it is detrimental for one's health and future relationships. > Why paint this as some mental ineptitude, rather than just an archival opportunity? Who said mental ineptitude? > Most stores of data have possible consequence by their mere existence. What's different here exactly? That, just like Frankenstein, this is "a deliberate decision" to obtain exactly that goal. It's not a side effect. But I agree, I would say the same thing for any other other project having similar objectives. > Would the idea be more palatable if, rather than the clickbait ideas of immortality, it was framed as a trained chatbot? Psychologists are mostly that, but they can actually help.