h a l f b a k e r yFree set of rusty screwdrivers if you order now.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
No title
I chose this category just in case some AI gets a clue. | |
Some humans excel at certain activities. Some humans excel with certain attributes. Some humans excel in certain sciences. Some humans excel in certain music. Some humans excel in etc. etc. etc.
Some don't
First off; it's the combination of 'don'ts' which make a 'do'.
Second off;
why are we allowing ourselves to be limited by the 'average' of these numbers.
I propose that ... if you're all bent on having digital ID's then each individual ID should have it's own rating.
"Of course Mr. Andretti you are permitted to drive at excessive speeds. We are so sorry to have pulled you over this evening. We hope you understand, that was impressive."
"Yes Andre the Giant, the fact that you've consumed fourteen beers this evening does not impair you from driving, carry on."
Etc.
Stop the nanny state in its tracks.
Now. Rather than later when we all know it will be too late.
[link]
|
| |
Wouldn’t evaluating everyones competencies to the nth degree in so many areas - and telling them what they can AND CANNOT do - be a massive EXTENSION of the nanny state? |
|
| |
Yes it sounds like the Chinese Social Credit system |
|
| |
I think it would be the opposite of the Chinese social credit system.
Most laws get written in response to some idiot either hurting themselves or others, and then everybody else gets painted with the same legal brush which was used to deal with that idiot.
At least half of the people you've ever met are of below average intelligence, below average reflexes, and below average awareness. |
|
| |
What we are and are not allowed to do in life is directly influenced by their below average inabilities. |
|
| |
There should be a scale of some sort. Not all of us need a legal cocoon designed to keep idiots from harming others or themselves and it should be documented. |
|
| |
I agree that's a problem, I just disagree with your solution. |
|
| |
I don't think it is my solution. I think it is going to happen whether we want it to or not.
Artificial Intelligence will soon, for whomever has access to it, be able to determine your entire history of accomplishments, credentials, mistakes, and projected goals in an instant.
This would just add another personalized layer to what's gonna already happen. |
|
| |
I'm seeing reduced social mobility; someone acquires a history of being bad at things, because of a poor family background, and then, through this system, they have even fewer opportunities to get good at things. |
|
| |
Perhaps, but as it stands, people are having fewer opportunities because their aptitudes are not recognized. They are lost in the crowd. There is no system in place to see them.
This would eliminate the effects of a poor family background for those who excel in spite of it. |
|
| |
Yes some people will be restricted to the slow-lane.
But not everybody else because of them. |
|
| |
It is very much like the Social Credit system. You are permitted privileges if you demonstrate that you have the approved personal attributes. If you don't have those approved attributes you face more restrictions on a sliding scale. |
|
| |
You don't get to chose for yourself whether you get the privileges - obviously - otherwise everyone would chose maximum privileges and minimum restrictions. The System decides what restrictions and privileges you get. The System obviously operates in the interests of The System and not in your interests. |
|
| |
If I could give this idea a (negative) fishbone, I would |
|
| |
But... a negative fish-bone is a croissant. |
|
| |
//If you don't have those approved attributes you face more restrictions on a sliding scale.// |
|
| |
Not 'approved' attributes?...
... that's how things work now, only useful, (to the powers that currently be), attributes themselves are catalogued.
Certain attributes may not currently be considered useful.
'Useful' is subject to change.
Change happens fast.
How fast can you non-intuitive entities adapt to the changes without some sort of index to reference? |
|
| |
You don't. You can't. You've been conditioned. |
|
| |
None of my conditioning took hold, so I look at everything, thinking wtf is wrong with these people? |
|
| |