erasmuse
Something like historical examples of fundamental breakthroughs in science or great works of art produced by committee.
Criticism is for stuff one doesn't like, which is why it belongs firmly in the public realm of news, politics, etc. A group isn't public. When it comes to your private work, ignore criticism and trust your intuition. Ideas need room to grow just like children do.
Yes. "Find what you love and let it kill you" somebody said. And most people don't feel safe unless they're living fearfully close to the edge of what is possible for them. In the past men worked till they dropped dead in their 40s to keep their families alive through the winter; women had baby after baby until they died or couldn't otherwise cope.
The strange thing is that, absent those harsh historical conditions, people still want the feeling of an edge, an existential risk. So they gamble, they do drugs, etc.
But these aren't good edges to be on. There are many real, urgent problems the world faces that could benefit from obsessive, risk-seeking commitment to the 'crazy unknown'. Addiction-level commitment. It shouldn't have to be to drugs. How do we funnel ourselves towards these problems?
Good point and you're not the first to point this out to me today. I may have to amend my thesis...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGyQmH9NZcw
There's at least one thing about the film, though, that I find mysterious. It was given a 'U' rating in the UK (which means universal, i.e. suitable for all ages). Yet many people find it scarily unwatchable -- why?
SPOILERS. True, there's blood, which is unusual for a children's animation. The enemy warren, savagely run by General Woundwort, is terrifying. But I think the real objection seems to be the perception that vulnerable little rabbits are being picked off one by one as our group journeys across the countryside. Yet, if you look closely, you notice that only one member of the group, a minor character, is actually killed (Violet; by a bird of prey). Bigwig escapes from the snare, Hazel recovers from being shot, and so on.
UPDATE. I think I've figured it out. Because of the beautiful song 'Bright Eyes' (sung by Art Garfunkel), we have mourned Hazel even though he was only wounded. So it feels as if he has died, even though he hasn't.
OK, at least one of the bigguns is pointing at Earth. But, you know what they say, every existential threat is an opportunity in disguise! In this case, potentially unlimited funding for the study and development of asteroid harnessing technology. That's before you sell the metals.
Indeed! The way I see it, identity derives from memory. So to the extent (if any) that they share identical memories they are strictly the same person. Beyond that I would guess there may be some (false) identification with behaviours of the other twin, in a manner redolent of Gazzaniga and Sperry's famous split brain experiment:
An exception is the Alexander Technique (AT), which I think cured my RSI, despite medical doctors and physiotherapists being unable to help. AT hasn't been incorporated into mainstream medicine yet, presumably because nobody can explain how it works (though it doesn't make any obviously superstitious claims).
But this lack of good explanation goes way further, beyond alternative therapies and into the heart mainstream medicine. There is a problem with medical science, imo. Most 'testing' and clincical trial related-work is beset by empiricism, wherein many treatments are assessed without an idea of how they allegedly could work.
As I understand it, this is why a large proportion of medical studies can't be reproduced: we understand by now that theory without experiment leads nowhere; most of us don't yet appreciate that experiment without theory is equally useless.
This is why I see even Science in its present form as insufficient for medical progress.
Rather, solid engineering is the more reliable answer, which is essentially the approach of the anti-aging SENS Research Foundation. Our philosophy should be, as far as possible, to engineer and fix the body, repairing its accumulated damage and so forth before it gets ill or aged.
Sandboxing. Is it like this?
http://www.ptaugustacsc.sa.edu.au/images/sandpit.jpg
Or like this?
https://s3.amazonaws.com/audreywatters/factory_counting.jpg
Yet such things are done by apparently good and nice people trying to work in the best interests of humanity. So how can we expect to somehow get it right in the case of an AGI without turning him into a resentful demon?
I think the application of 'disregard others' to this case would be to ignore what other software teams working on the same problem are doing.