I enjoy pressing keys and entering code; I find it to be the most efficient way to communicate with my computer. Why would I not spend my time doing something I enjoy?
I thought you were talking about economic efficiency, not maximizing enjoyment. You can do anything you want with your time if you're not worried about economics, but that sort of contradicts your original statement.
That’s assuming no disease, mental illness, unforeseen events, injuries, forced poverty, unexpected deaths, etc. A great deal of family dynamics is outside of a person’s full control.
That's also neglecting the fact that Indian boomers are very nosy and the culture pressures adults to have kids but gives 0 support. Neither culture nor religion or the govt does anything to help.
> I suppose you're one of them right wingers who live in an alternate reality
I suppose you are one of the left wingers who don't know how country used to be before 2014 ?
I am too from the same country. Extrapolating your experience to 1.4 billion people of different languages and cultures is not a sign of intelligent person.
> Gee if all grandparents are helping them why is TFR 1.6 hahaha
Weird that in previous edit you listed out all the supposed problems and then again edited and blamed 1.6 TFR solely on grand parents not supporting.
Looks like you are clutching at straws to justify your point.
Do you have anything to contribute to the conversation other than trolling or anecdotal examples?
This is not reddit. Please refrain from trolling and have a fact based conversation
You are commenting on a thread where TFR has seena surprise bust. I would have stated examples of Western democracies which provide clean air, good jobs, good public infra that Indian govt is unable to provide and yet their TFR is also going down.
But the difference is, India suddenly had a TFR collapse. Not a gradual one like Japan. That's why Economist published an article and that's why you are commenting on it.
Every other country has seen a gradual decline except India that saw a crash
So I suppose 2 or 3 people whose grandparents support them (as per you) are having 2 kids while others have 1 or 0
Anecdotal evidence isn't much of an evidence because the country is 125 crore people. You are disproving your own point but you can't see that
> Do you have anything to contribute to the conversation other than trolling or anecdotal examples?
Wasn't your initial claim itself anecdotal evidence ?
> Please refrain from trolling and have a fact based conversation
And what exactly is "I suppose you're one of them right wingers who live in an alternate reality" ? Is that good faith argumentation ? I was thinking you would want me to give it back in kind.
None of what you said is fact based.
> So I suppose 2 or 3 people whose grandparents support them (as per you) are having 2 kids while others have 1 or 0
It is staggering to me that you lack basic reading comprehension skills. Do I have to spoon-feed you what I am disagreeing with ?
Your initial claim: "Neither culture nor religion or the govt does anything to help." Is apparently fact based because ?
From your previous comment: "Gee if all grandparents are helping them why is TFR 1.6 hahaha"
Did I say ALL grandparents support their kids ? Do you lack BASIC comprehension skills ? Why are you arguing a straw man ?
My pushback was on: "Neither culture nor religion or the govt does anything to help.".
And I have told you I know plenty of grandparents who support their kids. I didn't say EVERY grandparent supports their kids. I didn't say this is common across all of India.
But YOU said "Neither culture nor religion or the govt does anything to help." It was YOU who generalized all of India.
You couldn't just take the L.
> This is not reddit. Please refrain from trolling and have a fact based conversation
Ok give me what facts you used to arrive at some of the claims you used in your other comments.
> Very few couples have kids of their own violitin.
Really ?
> culture pressures adults to have kids but gives 0 support
I agree that culture pressures adults. Which facts did you use to conclude that it gives 0 support ?
> The fact that TFR has crashed suddenly that blindsided everyone should be a hint about how supportive governments/society/religion is.
Isn't TFR dropping in urban areas common across the world ?
Do you know of any government or culture that reversed this ?
It is weird that you keep putting the blame on "governments/society/religion" when decreasing TFR is common phenomenon across the (urban) world.
EDIT: I want to make it a bit more clear since you have some trouble understanding nuance.
You can't say culture gives 0 support, and it is backend by 1.6 TFR. Hence, proved.
TFR dropping in common phenomenon across the world. It involves plenty of variables. You can't make up a claim and justify that by showing declining TFR.
Please ask any AI tool about how TFR crash of India is different from TFR reduction in the western world. I refuse to engage with your pointless conversation anymore. Tata
I opened this after a few days and for a minute there, I had to double check if this indeed was Reddit (given the absolute lack of self awareness in the comment)
Not religious at all but... "To those who is given much..."
If all they do is not have kids and claim that we are a cancer the minimum they could do is that other classic
Speaking is silver but silence is gold...
And well I firmly believe the biggest problem is the pervasive desire to be weak and complain by those who have the possibility of actual impact.
The battle is lost before it's fought and all.
But yeah we are being led by people with "inferior" visions for the world ~ Plato... But calling ourselves shit ain't gonna help it's just giving yourself and easy exit.
You might not like it, but by choosing not to reproduce they ARE having an actual impact on the world (as this debate about their actions demonstrates).
Maybe we, as a species, would have better long term outcomes if we reflected more before blindly charging forward exactly as our parents did (and their parents before them).
Maybe they feel we should choose a different course and look for better/different ways of living and being as a species. There is no such thing as infinite growth, we should probably act accordingly.
If talking is impact there is an impact.
But it makes the word kind of meaningless (a common issue).
All I know from them is their words... Which I hope we can agree where kind of negative (I personally prefer not to be a cancer hbu ?)
There is no such thing "as a species"... It's not like we are ants...
Some groups of humans/individuals are net neutral, some net positive and most net negative.
The question is always about incentives and externalities... and not what we as a nation/city/... Whatever prefer but what we are willing to stop doing...
At the end of the day the world is the way it is because the people who choose the game are the ones who keep playing it.
The thing that got me with his comment is that he based on his website is relatively succesful... Unlike this fake belief that billionaires hold all the power it is in general the 0.1% that hold the power... With the consent of rhe 9.9% and he's most likely 9.9%
...
This not having kids as a noble sacrifice is just choosing to be weak tbh unless he's actually tried but if that is the case it's definitely not in public.
Using a metaphor to illustrate a point is neither negative nor positive, what matters is if it is helpful in communicating.
The often quoted: "Infinite growth is the mentality of a cancer cell" is fairly accurate for describing human growth (when there is no real concern for any externalities such as environmental preservation or resource conservation). The abstract comparison does not bother me in the slightest.
Humans are a species like any other animal/insect. Ants have workers and drones, soldiers and queens (some ants evolved to do nearly nothing as a reserve work force). Trying to defining the worth of sentient beings based on abstract value functions (positive/negative, success/failure) is a narrow and sad way of looking at the world.
I have no idea what "game" you are referring to. Are you talking about life? I think that is a sad way to look at the world. Life isn't a game and there are many ways to live a good life while helping others (kin or not).
Not having children can be a noble sacrifice if someone is doing it to prevent passing on chronic illness or to prevent suffering. Someone caring for elderly parents and choosing to delay having children indefinitely does not make them "weak" as you like to suggest. Giving up something you want for the greater good of the world around you is worth understanding, maybe even worth emulating.
You seem to be looking at life and existence through an extremely narrow lens and judging people without really knowing anything about them. Hurling insults around casually as if you have everything figured out, which you do not (nobody does).
I would suggest you take time to talk to people more about their life and experiences before judging them so harshly. Try to hold back your insults and practice empathy instead; you might learn something about life and its vast breadth of expressions.
You seem to be making a lot of assumptions about the person I was replying to, all positive and me allmost all of them negative...
I would suggest you a mirror + ass out of you and me reminder... The human ability to know the motives about the other person is severely overestimated...
I wanted to have a friendly philosophical thought experiment / different pov with the original poster, if he had the time and desire to do so. instead you butted in and went into a full blown j'accuse style which was very unpalatable.
I wish you a nice day touching some grass and enjoying all the beautiful stuff a cancer iyho has created. Take care.
Personally, especially in the age of llm's, I wouldn't do so much projection and insinuation under a profile that is linked to your online/real identity.
While on the one hand strong opinions are generally appreciated, not too many people who consider themselves a cancer are looking for some to help them with "overall growth."...
I guess for some reason it struck a nerve and that's why you felt the need to continue (well and sunken cost phallacy obviously) but again no upside and unlimited downside.
Anyway if you're in vietnam hmu for a drink but imho do yourself a favor and stop trying to get imaginary internet points - we are all dogs (on the internet ...) for good or bad but you have a name.
You are using so many words to tell a person they should just kill themselves without directly saying it. I flagged your comment anyway. I hope the moderator understands the context.
If that is the (logical) conclusion you come to maybe the answer is that the person should be more careful about their choice of words because of the conclusion it leads to ?
Not that I expect too much deep thinking of someone who chooses to call themself trumpdong...
I totally agree with your reading/impressions of this essay.
I normally really like Chiang‘s writings so the complete disregard for the possibility of unknown complex emergent properties in large neural networks and the stunning lack of curiosity shown about this new and powerful technology and its potential shocked me from someone like him.
His being so sure about something he can’t possibly know felt like an insecure zealot desperately clinging to an object of faith rather than a calm, rational actor searching for truth in the face of the unknown.
A survey of 349 technical workers (including 87 software engineers, 71 researchers, 129 academics and PhD students, and 48 founders and managers) about their usage of AI tools.
What evidence is there for humans having souls to support your "wisest default"? What would constitute "strong proof otherwise" in the case of machines?
Wouldn't the wise position be that since there is no evidence of souls at all that the default should be that both humans and machines do not contain a soul until proven otherwise?
Not to me. The wise position starts from "Humans are mysterious, but I am one and I see that others are like me, so I think we have souls." along with "I get what a machine is from first principles and based on all I know, they don't feel."
I get that this isn't as rigorous as one might like, but I think in the real world it's wise.
reply