Post

Efe Karakus
@efekarakus.com

It's interesting that I agree with the "analysis" of Nick Bostrom of what technology is for (efficiency) and what would happen as an end state of achieving peak technology. But I completely disagree (like the host) that this end state represents utopia. This seems like a nightmare to me 😅.

Efe Karakus
@efekarakus.com

He himself says technology itself cannot be an end goal, technology is *for* something else. Yet, he still ends up favoring a world of complete technological efficiency, where every barrier is removed and we achieved maximum plasticity.

Efe Karakus
@efekarakus.com

Afaict this is the argument: 1. Assume we have achieved max superintelligence w/ AI, then humans would be like hamsters in the hamster wheel where we artificially limit ourselves 2. Therefore, we should remove these fake restraints and accept whatever the next wave brings.

0 reposts0 likes

Efe Karakus
@efekarakus.com

I disagree because the point of technology is not to remove *all* barriers. In my utopia, technology should increase efficiency as long as it's aligned with endeavors that allow us to flourish as humans. Instead, if it results in our elimination, it's by definition not serving the right end goal.