If AI could be conscious and sentient, such that any reasonable person would be obliged to grant it rights of some kind, THEN it must be taboo to create it, because that would be tantamount to creating immortal, indefinitely scalable political power directly from electricity. Don’t do that. If you do that your own life should be forfeit and your creations summarily destroyed.
If we can’t get even anywhere close to a consensus on what men are, how they are different from women, and why they matter, then there is no hope for a general solution to the problem.
Any solution that does appear will be immediately branded toxic by someone who is not a man.
That there's a question in your mind about what can "rehabilitate" this is troubling, but sure:
An event centered on what men want, costing thousands of dollars a ticket, with paid female talent there to "help" them is skating around the definition of prostitution in the same way that Kalshi skates around the defintion of gambling.
I'm sure Epstein and his buddies justified their rape and abuse by throwing bags of money at the girls too. If that's not enough to make you call bullshit on the entire enterprise, that's on you.
I don't believe in regulating how people have fun. But when you create an environment where it's hard to tell the difference between fun and coercion, throw money and power into the mix, claim it's not about trading money for sex but everyone paid money and there's quite a bit of sex happening, pretend that it's about some high minded principle like "helping people to relate better"? Please.
This sounds emotive and judgmental, which is totally okay-- but I don't see any reason I should change my opinion, which is that there is nothing to rehabilitate. This event involves consenting adults, experimenting with life. There's no reason for you to conclude that anyone was coerced or trafficked.
I guess you are convinced that women were being exploited and raped at this event, but I fail to see how that conclusion springs from anywhere other than your cynical imagination.
Not all cases are wrong though. One in five is correct and the "Looks correct" scores also and gets XP. So it does practise knowing when not to doubt..a little..
"Critical thinking" has always seemed like a strange concept to me. Its definitions tend to bundle every desirable cognitive habit together until the term basically means "thinking correctly".
Indeed, there are some strange definitions of critical thinking out there which boil down to "good thinking." My definition is specific: thinking about thinking with the aim of not getting fooled. In other words, when you specifically analyze your own thinking or other people's thinking for the presence of significant errors, you are doing critical thinking.
reply