I'll take launching over 12,000 sats to saturate the planet with more EMFs as a tip he may not have humanity's best interests at heart. And his cars use more energy and planetary destruction than a clean burning combustion engine.
Kurzweil, eccentric AI genius who wrote a program telling a piano how to compose [mechanical music], invented a device to scan a page and read it aloud to the blind, and a complete believer in AI for the future. Look him up. And then, for comparison in the AI world, look up David Gelernter.
"Our devices are designed to give people the ability to communicate more easily via text or speech synthesis, to follow their curiosity on the web, or to express their creativity through photography, art, or writing apps."
So there’s a bit of nuance here. There is a difference between the technology interacting with a device such as your phone and that device being “on the internet”. I’m quite sure Musk has said that Neuralink will not be connected to the internet so it will not be hackable.
The point of this (the end game if you will) is to reduce the threat of AGI and from that perspective the argument is compelling. The part that people are worried about is decades away and may never even happen. In the meantime it will help people with injuries. We may already be AGI slaves before anyone gets a chance to have Elon’s wires in their head.
As an aside I find it amusing that so many people clutch their pearls at the mention of Neuralink while totally ignoring Optimus. Like, no one ever mentions Optimus. That tells me that the propaganda is working.
Yeah, I get that it's sort of an extended input device at the moment with no 'write back' to the brain and no data from brain to computer other than as an HID, but we have a thing called scope creep and people are rightly concerned about that.
Even if Neuralink doesn't extend the tech in that way, it only needs a nefarious agency (USA, Israel, China etc) to license the tech and extend it in a direction that gives 'them' more control or surveillance capabilities. After all, Einstein didn't nuke Japan or prosecute the cold war when he discovered that E=MC^2, did he? And nor did Oppenheimer.
BTW I've no idea what Optimus is and a search turns up a million things, none of which seem relevant. Got a link?
Fair points. What bothers me is the screeching about Musk and Neuralink and the transhumanist accusation while there are much worse actors out there. Musk, if he is a transhumanist, is not open about it. Google and basically the entire WEF is. You make the argument that Musk may develop technology that could be hijacked by a hostile entity. This is entirely reasonable. We can have the debate over whether the risk is worth the potential reward but your position is definitely valid.
Here’s a link to Optimus. I found one with the date of 4/20...lol.
Musks biggest stated concern is the declining birth rate. He has I think 5 kids and got Grimes pregnant so I think he’s definitely doing his part to save humanity. I don’t think that’s going to help when the useless eaters are drugged up and spend all day playing video games and having sex with their robot.
The Starlink and EMF connection needs more evidence. Maybe it’s there, I’ve not seen anything convincing.
I’m glad you brought up the energy consumption regarding Tesla, this is definitely true. Musk has a vision that we will transition to renewable energy for everything, so everything will be electric - cars, factories, airplanes, ships, etc. Doing this will not be possible without major improvements in battery technology. Assuming that we do get that next step battery tech we will need to use existing forms of energy to build the infrastructure. So short term there would be significant use of fossil fuels to transition to renewables.
Although the life cycle of any EV uses more energy than an ICE vehicle I think it’s a net positive. If city centers increased EV usage then air pollution would drop in those particular areas (the LA basin comes to mind). Overall I think Tesla is a step in the right direction, it’s probably not going to be the ultimate solution but it’s leading us down the right path.
I'll take launching over 12,000 sats to saturate the planet with more EMFs as a tip he may not have humanity's best interests at heart. And his cars use more energy and planetary destruction than a clean burning combustion engine.
That and wanting to wire people's brains to the internet...
Fake news. Musk has explicitly stated the opposite of your claim.
This is the biggest problem with discussions involving Musk, people read some half truth or speculation somewhere and take it as gospel.
People are scared to death of Musk but have no problem with Kurzweil. Go figure.
Your habit of crying "Fake News!" at comments to specifically Caitlin's Johnstone's newsletter (3 times so far) amuses me.
Who is kirzweil.
Kurzweil, eccentric AI genius who wrote a program telling a piano how to compose [mechanical music], invented a device to scan a page and read it aloud to the blind, and a complete believer in AI for the future. Look him up. And then, for comparison in the AI world, look up David Gelernter.
Ray Kurzweil, Google transhumanist praying at the altar of singularity. Infinitely more dangerous than Musk.
Huh? https://neuralink.com/applications/
"Our devices are designed to give people the ability to communicate more easily via text or speech synthesis, to follow their curiosity on the web, or to express their creativity through photography, art, or writing apps."
So there’s a bit of nuance here. There is a difference between the technology interacting with a device such as your phone and that device being “on the internet”. I’m quite sure Musk has said that Neuralink will not be connected to the internet so it will not be hackable.
The point of this (the end game if you will) is to reduce the threat of AGI and from that perspective the argument is compelling. The part that people are worried about is decades away and may never even happen. In the meantime it will help people with injuries. We may already be AGI slaves before anyone gets a chance to have Elon’s wires in their head.
As an aside I find it amusing that so many people clutch their pearls at the mention of Neuralink while totally ignoring Optimus. Like, no one ever mentions Optimus. That tells me that the propaganda is working.
Yeah, I get that it's sort of an extended input device at the moment with no 'write back' to the brain and no data from brain to computer other than as an HID, but we have a thing called scope creep and people are rightly concerned about that.
Even if Neuralink doesn't extend the tech in that way, it only needs a nefarious agency (USA, Israel, China etc) to license the tech and extend it in a direction that gives 'them' more control or surveillance capabilities. After all, Einstein didn't nuke Japan or prosecute the cold war when he discovered that E=MC^2, did he? And nor did Oppenheimer.
BTW I've no idea what Optimus is and a search turns up a million things, none of which seem relevant. Got a link?
Fair points. What bothers me is the screeching about Musk and Neuralink and the transhumanist accusation while there are much worse actors out there. Musk, if he is a transhumanist, is not open about it. Google and basically the entire WEF is. You make the argument that Musk may develop technology that could be hijacked by a hostile entity. This is entirely reasonable. We can have the debate over whether the risk is worth the potential reward but your position is definitely valid.
Here’s a link to Optimus. I found one with the date of 4/20...lol.
Musks biggest stated concern is the declining birth rate. He has I think 5 kids and got Grimes pregnant so I think he’s definitely doing his part to save humanity. I don’t think that’s going to help when the useless eaters are drugged up and spend all day playing video games and having sex with their robot.
https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/20/musk-says-robot-aimed-for-2023-will-be-worth-more-than-teslas-car-business/
The Starlink and EMF connection needs more evidence. Maybe it’s there, I’ve not seen anything convincing.
I’m glad you brought up the energy consumption regarding Tesla, this is definitely true. Musk has a vision that we will transition to renewable energy for everything, so everything will be electric - cars, factories, airplanes, ships, etc. Doing this will not be possible without major improvements in battery technology. Assuming that we do get that next step battery tech we will need to use existing forms of energy to build the infrastructure. So short term there would be significant use of fossil fuels to transition to renewables.
Although the life cycle of any EV uses more energy than an ICE vehicle I think it’s a net positive. If city centers increased EV usage then air pollution would drop in those particular areas (the LA basin comes to mind). Overall I think Tesla is a step in the right direction, it’s probably not going to be the ultimate solution but it’s leading us down the right path.