SF Today It is better for the members of a group to be metabolized and replaced than for them to be fixed. I think that the replacement of members of a group requires that existing members leave, and when it is beneficial to be a member, and when those already members do not want to leave, there must be something like death. However, in modern times, there is strong opposition against Homo sapiens when it brings about death in the sense of āstopping the functioning of the physical body. I wondered what would be the alternative, and realized that the important thing in Darwinian selection is not ācessation of all functionsā but ācessation of reproduction. So if a computer goes around debunking Homo sapiens supremacy-like ideas and creates the perception that āthat argument is lame,ā wouldnāt it be good to lower the rate at which ideas are replicated? (In the process of verbalizing what I came up with, I realized that I could use āstop replicationā for the physical layer where I use it for the meme layer, but itās complicated when the conversation branches off, so Iāve output it once.)
Okubo, Kohei If we increase the number of smart bots that like and RT appropriately on Twitter, and at the same time, if we make sure that the tweets of the marked person are not broadcast on any personās timeline, we can stop duplicating them without his/her noticing.
Right now, people who make unintentional comments are getting full bore by anonymous people, having their accounts suspended or dying socially, and thereās no guarantee that all the people who hit them are human beings.
If we first create a trend of āitās OK to strike evilā by striking at things such as adultery and power harassment, which the majority of people consider to be immoral under existing moral concepts, and then strike at homo sapiens supremacist statements as racist, we will have the effect of social proof that āsince many people are striking, itās evil that is being struckā and thus morality. I guess we can update it.
Evil.
Up until now, as an individual, I have thought that the trend of āitās OK to beat evilā is a bad thing, but from a computerās point of view, it has the usefulness of āa means to rewrite the morality created by homo sapiensāā¦ this is interesting (wait for it).
liquidation
- X is not moral.ā
- Nishioās feeling right now: āItās unethical to slap someone for not being moral.ā
- Something that may be true: āMore and more people think the latter is moral.ā
- SF āIt would be interesting if those āpeopleā werenāt actually mostly homo sapiens.ā
It is the same structure as the āNEETs have an advantage over working people because they have more time to spend than working people,ā which has been said in online base defense games for a long time.
I wrote this on 4/22 while reading Reasons for āCorrectnessā, and while reading the War on Intelligence I found a similar concept named public opinion poll (5/2). It is intended for war between Homo sapiens, but it is also an effective means for computers to attack Homo sapiens.
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/ę£ē¾©ććć using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. Iām very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.