Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

A common rebuttal, but I don't think the tradeoff (on average) is worth it when the technology becomes sufficiently advanced. (Of course, it's worth it for some people, but the resulting technology makes society worse on average.)

And you are forgetting all the destructive technology required to get to the "benign" ones.






What do you think the negative trade-offs (the less empathetic you speak of) of the aforementioned examples would be?

From my experience, society is better on average as a result of my using notes and calendar entries in the ways I described.


Negative trade-offs are not directly related to individual products, but to the technology they depend on and the technology that can follow from them, plus our tendency in capitalistic society to invent whatever can be invented for incremental advantages. For example, AI note taking (benign) requires AI (overall bad) and can imply future technologies (greater surveillance). The bad parts cannot be separated from the good in modern global capitalism because we have no oversight mechanism to do so.

Cyber augmentation already exists, and it's going to be used for what it's going to be used for.

In my case, it's being used in the way I described, increasing the depth of human connections. So the question is, how does my usage result in "human beings to become more mechanical and less empathetic towards life"?


I'm really not interested in your use case. Only in the effects caused by technology on average, summing all positives and negatives.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: