The game of course didn’t end as profound as fans believe. It critisizes our imperfections, which is a fair point, but it doesn’t offer any solutions.
Let’s see where we are 20 years later: The modern fact checkers and censors are no perfectly biased and objective AI bots. Quite the opposite: the censors at Facebook and Twitter are ideology driven. They select the memes/genes that are allowed to survive. Their goal is not to advance TRUTH but to further the narratives of their own echo chamber. They make things worse, by trying to make everyone joining their ideological colored version of “free” speech.
Would I be afraid of an objective AI that tells me when I err? I don’t think I would. Would you?
Such an unideological AI would and could NOT assess all of our utterances as RIGHT and WRONG. There is a huge area of uncertainty between factual correct and clear incorrect statements. Many questions or opinions are culture or ethics dependent. Conservatives or true libertarians understand this: A policy that works in Alabama might not work in California. Something that is fine in Austria/Europe is unacceptable in Austin/Texas. That's why conservatives are mostly against censorship and internationalism but pro federalism.
This game suggests that there is a big problem with freedom of choice. We are unable to distinguish good from bad, value from junk, truth from lies. True to a certain degree but only on an individual level. That we are fools in need of centralized protection is what the NYTimes, CNN and idiot Jack Dorsey believe. I believe in Hegel’s dialectic, where you have an idea, which hopefully captures part of the truth, and I have a different idea/opinion. The sum of yours and mine is more often better than our individual thoughts. If I disallow the expression of your thoughts, then I deprive myself and the world of a an evolved idea.
This is how all progress was achieved. Who invented the modern airplane? Thousands of people who contributed with their thoughts.
The AI in this game might be smarter than individuals/the main character but such a disenfranchised society is bound to fail. Centralising truth leads to totalitarianism and a weak society. Communist regimes tried this often, always with the same outcome. The official government newspaper in the Soviet Union was called PRAVDA. That’s TRUTH in English...
Nice! Liked it, but allow some thoughts:
The game of course didn’t end as profound as fans believe. It critisizes our imperfections, which is a fair point, but it doesn’t offer any solutions.
Let’s see where we are 20 years later: The modern fact checkers and censors are no perfectly biased and objective AI bots. Quite the opposite: the censors at Facebook and Twitter are ideology driven. They select the memes/genes that are allowed to survive. Their goal is not to advance TRUTH but to further the narratives of their own echo chamber. They make things worse, by trying to make everyone joining their ideological colored version of “free” speech.
Would I be afraid of an objective AI that tells me when I err? I don’t think I would. Would you?
Such an unideological AI would and could NOT assess all of our utterances as RIGHT and WRONG. There is a huge area of uncertainty between factual correct and clear incorrect statements. Many questions or opinions are culture or ethics dependent. Conservatives or true libertarians understand this: A policy that works in Alabama might not work in California. Something that is fine in Austria/Europe is unacceptable in Austin/Texas. That's why conservatives are mostly against censorship and internationalism but pro federalism.
This game suggests that there is a big problem with freedom of choice. We are unable to distinguish good from bad, value from junk, truth from lies. True to a certain degree but only on an individual level. That we are fools in need of centralized protection is what the NYTimes, CNN and idiot Jack Dorsey believe. I believe in Hegel’s dialectic, where you have an idea, which hopefully captures part of the truth, and I have a different idea/opinion. The sum of yours and mine is more often better than our individual thoughts. If I disallow the expression of your thoughts, then I deprive myself and the world of a an evolved idea.
This is how all progress was achieved. Who invented the modern airplane? Thousands of people who contributed with their thoughts.
The AI in this game might be smarter than individuals/the main character but such a disenfranchised society is bound to fail. Centralising truth leads to totalitarianism and a weak society. Communist regimes tried this often, always with the same outcome. The official government newspaper in the Soviet Union was called PRAVDA. That’s TRUTH in English...