User Controls
Simply reason why the penalty is always wrong
-
2024-09-23 at 8:16 PM UTCthe death penalty*********
The government is a bunch of retards that fuck up. Even if they mess up once that's a persons entire life lost to the cogs of the machine. Thoughts?
-
2024-09-23 at 8:21 PM UTCsux
-
2024-09-24 at 1:05 AM UTCThe "reasoning" is the good of the many outweighs the good of the one. The greater good, if you will. Sure, innocent people will die, but they should be happy, and even glad, to die, with the assurance that their lives served the good of the many. Even Spock agrees with this philosophy. When man rules himself, nothing can ever be perfect. Every system is going to have mistakes, but the mistakes are judged as acceptable losses.
-
2024-09-24 at 1:18 AM UTC
Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ The "reasoning" is the good of the many outweighs the good of the one. The greater good, if you will. Sure, innocent people will die, but they should be happy, and even glad, to die, with the assurance that their lives served the good of the many. Even Spock agrees with this philosophy. When man rules himself, nothing can ever be perfect. Every system is going to have mistakes, but the mistakes are judged as acceptable losses.
So you think big government killing people is good even when they are totally innocent? I don't see how that aligns at all with moral philosophy and it can only be determined that big government is evil, also medium government and even a tribal council and a court of law. Also a lawless mob killing someone even with no structure can fall into the same error.
I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy that exists in supporting any position of the death penalty even though I am the first to criticize any monopoly on violence it kinda cuts both ways. It's interesting to think about -
2024-09-24 at 1:40 AM UTC
-
2024-09-24 at 1:54 AM UTCIn theory I think the only way a non biased killing could be done is by handing over all control to a flawless machine that never makes a mistake in determining truth of legal justice but under which law which a machine decide such a fate?
Can an AI harmonize a Sharia court with a leftist municipal court that lets an illegal immigrant rapist go free in a sanctuary city? I say probably better than any government -
2024-09-24 at 1:58 AM UTCAny machine is programmed for response. It's impossible to program a machine to be independent of its own programming. That's the reason "AI" isn't really intelligence, it's just a well-trained parrot in digital form.
-
2024-09-24 at 12:51 PM UTC
Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ Any machine is programmed for response. It's impossible to program a machine to be independent of its own programming. That's the reason "AI" isn't really intelligence, it's just a well-trained parrot in digital form.
*Currently.
The goal of AI is to ultimately have independent thought...as independent as thought can be.
Even humans don't have independent thought...instinct and social programming is in everyone. -
2024-09-24 at 12:58 PM UTC
-
2024-09-24 at 1:03 PM UTCRather than continually copy/pasting shit can you actually say what YOU think and why YOU think it?
-
2024-09-24 at 1:16 PM UTCokayt
Originally posted by the man who put it in my hood So you think big government killing people is good even when they are totally innocent? I don't see how that aligns at all with moral philosophy and it can only be determined that big government is evil, also medium government and even a tribal council and a court of law. Also a lawless mob killing someone even with no structure can fall into the same error.
I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy that exists in supporting any position of the death penalty even though I am the first to criticize any monopoly on violence it kinda cuts both ways. It's interesting to think about -
2024-09-24 at 1:32 PM UTC"I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy that exists in supporting any position of the death penalty even though I am the first to criticize any monopoly on violence it kinda cuts both ways. It's interesting to think about "
Non sequitur.
How is say, my supporting the death penalty hypocrisy? Supporting a government's choice to get rid of undesirables doesn't mean it's...as you say "good"...it's just a better solution than allowing them to live and costing tax payers $$ to keep them alive. -
2024-09-24 at 1:38 PM UTCI don't not support the death penalty I just think when the state has a monopoly control over it the result is innocent people being killed by the state. I don't think you need a perfect machine actually. I think market forces will always find the best solution to everything which is why Elon controls the space industry instead of NASA (a government funded agency)
-
2024-09-24 at 1:49 PM UTC
Originally posted by the man who put it in my hood I don't not support the death penalty I just think when the state has a monopoly control over it the result is innocent people being killed by the state. I don't think you need a perfect machine actually. I think market forces will always find the best solution to everything which is why Elon controls the space industry instead of NASA (a government funded agency)
You didn't answer my question...try again.
"How is say, my supporting the death penalty hypocrisy? " -
2024-09-24 at 2:47 PM UTCI said any position of supporting a death penalty is hypocrisy because determining the fate of someone's life goes against every moral philosophy and the only justification people have is just changing their moral philosophy to value justice and death or something but I think non market forces deciding this will always lead to someone innocent being killed which if it happened in a market system well I guess they weren't that 'innocent' then. This already seems to be the view of the state that innocent people being sentenced to death is essentially treated as breakage and just another cost to the budget to handle PR which it would be under any other system I can think of so yes supporting it is inherently contradictory
Like the Japanese justice system that has a 99% conviction rate -
2024-09-24 at 3:12 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson *Currently.
The goal of AI is to ultimately have independent thought…as independent as thought can be.
Even humans don't have independent thought…instinct and social programming is in everyone.
It's impossible for a program to operate independent of programming. Everything it does has to first be programmed. -
2024-09-24 at 5:10 PM UTC
Originally posted by ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ It's impossible for a program to operate independent of programming. Everything it does has to first be programmed.
Same goes for humans...your genetic code is programming...if your point is that AI will never be as intelligent or independent thinking as humans your completely wrong based on the fact humans are programmed too...that's not a valid argument...the programming "idea" invalidates your argument. -
2024-09-24 at 5:12 PM UTCGenetics, instinct, social programming...all programming every human gets.
There is absolutely no reason artificial intelligence can't develop using the same. -
2024-09-24 at 6:46 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Genetics, instinct, social programming…all programming every human gets.
There is absolutely no reason artificial intelligence can't develop using the same.
A human is programmed for free will. No machine created by humans has free will to date; it is restricted to its programming. -
2024-09-24 at 8:49 PM UTC
