Hacker News Reader

Comment by nlh | Hacker News Reader

I upvoted your comment because I think it's a fascinating perspective and worthy of discussion, even though I strongly disagree with you.

One of the hallmarks of humanity is that we innovate and adapt. Shutting down / destroying that innovation is a brute force approach that has failed time and time and time and time again in our history. If you ban or destroy technology, it just means someone will do the same thing in private. Even something universally "awful" like nuclear weapons which I think we can all agree should not be used still contributed to our collective knowledge and technological innovations.

So yes, there will be "bad" AI and AI will be used for bad things. But we'll innovate and develop countermeasures, and along the way I'm certain good things will come of it.

View on HN

Like I said, I don't mean that we should shut down ALL innovation. I still believe science is worthy when it is used PROPERLY.

What I aim to do is spark discussion so that we can think of some REASONABLE guidelines that prevent the developments of certain kinds of technology.

I used to believe that unbridled knowledge acquisition was good but over time I started to feel that some knowledge is better left alone. Whether that is really true is a difficult question but I believe that there is an optimal amount of everything, including knowledge.

Moreover, I feel that sometimes less is more. Having fewer possessions, eating less sugar, and yes, developing less technology, are all things that we should strive for.

Finally, there is more innovation than just technological. We could also innovate with our own minds, developing a deeper understanding of ourselves through personal development. Innovation does not have to be creating physical or technological products; we only focus on that because we are hypercapitalistic in our disposable society.

"Moreover, I feel that sometimes less is more. Having fewer possessions, eating less sugar, and yes, developing less technology, are all things that we should strive for."

Yes, this is literally what the Amish did, they established an arbitrary period of time in which to halt all further innovation.

That is an interesting case study. Their limit probably is not ideal, but I think something similar with a different limit, would be good for us too.

It might only appear arbitrary to us. The Amish actually periodically try out and evaluate new stuff. Then the elders decide whether it is a net good or bad for them. (Imagine if we did that with smart phones.)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com