Do you think we could send out a message to the rest of the world?
One that would stir a change in people?
One that would inspire hope and courage to overcome petty differences?
Enough to settle our differences and bring about an era of peace and thus prosperity as a result of human collective collaboration?
Can we do it because we could work together to create a piece of literature that can stir base levels of emotion to forgo fear and abandon the power the few cling to the little this planet has in comparison to what the universe could have?
I just don't understand why we fight over so little of a piece of everything.
We can discover all the mysteries. All the wonders. All the experiences. Maybe not all of us individually but all of us could have so much more of such small pieces of the universe if we just collectively tried.
It is what we are working towards anyways. Why can we not get there faster?
Why do we cling to such old systems still?
We do so few hold so much power?
Why don't we see the power we have as a collective?
Why don't we stop the violence over what little makes us seem so different?
Why don't we exercise our power to provide? How can there not be enough if we work together?
>>450330
>dude just give peace a chance lmao
whatever nerd
>>450349
And why is it wrong?
>>450349
Don't use humor as a deflection of extrospection. Why make it a joke when we can make it so much more?
>>450354
Well if you have nothing to contribute I guess that says more about you than me.
>>450358
because it would require the human species to give up their humanity.
as long as there will be humans, there'll be differences in opinion, and differences strong enough to cause conflict.
>>450366
I'm with you senpai.
Human potential is limitless, with the right focus we can do anything. We just choose to focus of making one another the enemy.
>>450354
>we can't improve the world but I won't explain why, I'll just post a funny picture
>>450330
Are we fucked when strong general AI gets here?
So there's no point?
>>450393
Give up their humanity? How can you say that with all we've done? How far we've come?
Our humanity can be represented by our capability. If we could go from animals to humans, small groups to tribes, tribes to countries with people working to sustain organization and infrastructure.
How can we expedite this amount of progress?
>>450400
Exactly! So how do we do it? If we have a platform for communication as expansive as the internet couldn't we organize a movement? If we've been evolving to work together for so long and its produced so much why hasn't that caught on like a fucking bush fire?
>>450423
AI would surely realize this faster than us! AI would theoretically be capable of such intelligence it would come to this conclusion faster? Why would an AI be motivated to commit violence? What gain would it ultimately gain from such an act? Why should we be afraid of it?
How do we get people to start asking these questions?
Sorry if I am coming off really douchey. I'm a wee bit stoned. But I've been thinking about this so much lately and I don't know who to talk about it with. None of my friends care.
I can't talk about any of this shit on Facebook. Or with my friends. Too few people give a shit about this stuff or care to speculate.
Because of ideology.
>>450455
people still kill each other the reasons they've always killed over.
not much progress there.
you might be able to change that with a star trek-eque post scarcity utopia but that still leaves religion and ideology to kill over.
>>450478
>Why would an AI be motivated to commit violence?
That depends on the nature of the AI, and where humans get goals from.
Evolutionarily, creatures strongly driven by goals were the ones most likely to succeed and pass on their genes. So maybe goals and motivations in general are a product of evolution?
Or maybe their not. There's no way to tell, since all sentient creatures that currently exist evolved. It's impossible to say whether intelligence in general necessitates motivation.
>Why should we be afraid of it?
Because we don't know if it will have agency or not. If it does, it can do whatever it wants. It can wait 1,000 years and then backstab humanity when it's completely trusted. We need to proceed with extreme caution, unless you're genuinely in favor of humanity getting wiped out.
>How do we get people to start asking these questions?
I don't know. Start discussions yourself first?
>Sorry if I am coming off really douchey. I'm a wee bit stoned.
Have you heard of Roko's basilisk?
>>450562
>Roko's basilisk
A very interesting read! I'll continue to browse and learn more!
>>450330
It already was done during WWII dude.
It didn't work.
https://youtu.be/9dGPo9XBIPA
>>450587
Then perhaps these experiences our species has is necessary. I've listened to that speech a lot. I never for a second thought I was having original thoughts but I never understood why it couldn't have worked.
>>450455
Yup. The internet is key to pulling it off. Communication with thousands upon thousands of people in the world at once. I think all it needs is what any pop movement needs: publicity.
>mane fuck cultures and histories and ethnicities and shit we all just the same you know what im sayin like why cant everyone just get along
>>450636
>What is an attempt at derision by purposefully making assumptions and generalizations of the opponents position and expressing it in the form of satire.
>>450743
the opponent has nothing beyond fuzzy feel good shit cribbed from a john lennon song.
>>450758
>Call out on making assumptions.
>Makes more assumptions.
Di-di-did I m-m-meme ri-right daddy?
>>450776
what are some points that the OP made that make sense?
its literally just
>why can't we all get along and have world peace
stoner-tier shit
>>450776
>everyone can live in peace
>everyone can act together for the same cause
>everyone can even have the same cause at all
Do you understand how retarded you sound
>>450799
I never said any of it was totally realistic. I don't know if total peace is ever a possibility. Not that I'd ever know I suppose.
Just because you don't feel I'm educated enough to your clearly realistic goals doesn't mean you need to act like a douche. I guess you win the argument. I don't suppose posting ones own thoughts, ideas, feelings on a post is what this site is for.
>>450881
yeah well maybe you should get better ideas next time.
or at least flesh them out.
>>450792
I could have expounded more. But the post I was originally gonna make was too long for the text field. So I scrapped it in favor of inquiring if anybody ever thought those ideas were possible and if and how we would accomplish such a task in a rather dramatic fashion for a cheesy introduction.
You can tell me your ideas you know? I'd like to hear them.
>>450881
>p-please feel bad for me guys
>you should all be more accepting of me thinking I understand everything
>>450893
What are you fucking talking about man? That is why I'm here. That is why I'm talking to people. I want to learn more so I'm talking about it. Where in the flying fuck could I possibly go to talk about it or discuss with people the validity of such a concept? Facebook?
I want to learn more so what do I need to ask people to get them to give constructive feedback?
Or is trolling and belittlement too enticing?
>>450932
Maybe Reddit?
Perhaps a sort of open conspiracy to create a modern utopia, where the global network of human communication takes on the aspect of a singular world brain
>>450899
Well if you're gonna just misrepresent my position I guess I'll just leave you to your opinion of me. Not that I expected much from 4chan.
>>450743
>No, it's ok, he's not sincere.
>>450799
>You sound retarded, but I won't explain or elaborate on why you're wrong.
>>450958
Or maybe, seeing as we appear to be bound for either utopia or oblivion, inviting the whole earth to play a sort of world game presenting humanity with a realistic inventory of all the resources aboard this spaceship earth and challenging them to tread the critical path, doing the best for the most with the least
>>450330
war is integral to the spiritual well being of man
it is sacred and powerful.
war not only against the external foe but the internal one, that being passion and animal lust for life.
From the words of Krishna speaking to Arjuna
>"Making equal pleasure and pain, profit and loss, victory and defeat, fight for the sake of fighting; in this way you will incur no sin"
>"To the non-constant (body, matter) there is no permanence; to the constant (spirit) there is no change. Know that by which all this is pervaded (spirit) to be indestructible. He who thinks it the killer, he who thinks it slain, neither is in knowledge: for it slays not, nor is it slain. It is not killed when the body is killed. But perishable are all these bodies. Therefore, arise and fight"
Peace is stagnation and slow rotting death, devoid of enlightenment through the ultimate in anti-material ritual, combat.
We thus arrive at this general vision of life: like electrical bulbs too brightly lit, like circuits invested with too high a potential, human beings fall and die only because a power burns within them which transcends their finitude, which goes beyond everything they can do and want. This is why they develop, reach a peak, and then, as if overwhelmed by the wave which up to a given point had carried them forward, sink, dissolve, die and return to the unmanifest. But the one who does not fear death, the one who is able, so to speak, / to assume the powers of death by becoming everything which it destroys, overwhelms and shatters - this one finally passes beyond limitation, he continues to remain upon the crest of the wave, he does not fall, and what is beyond life manifests itself within him.
War is how we purify both yourself and our society, in tearing down the preconceptions which build up like residue everywhere.
I don't think we could. Difference is identical to identity.
>>450978
he just did
its an implied elaboration.
>>450979
At the very least, we should take precautions, as the science of control and communication develops, to ensure that the human use of human beings prevails over their inhuman use
>If everyone thought the same way I did the world would be a better place.
the sacrality of war, that is to say, that which provides a spiritual justification for war and the necessity of war, constitutes a tradition in the highest sense of the term: it is something which has appeared always and everywhere, in the ascending cycle of every great civilization; while the neurosis of war, the humanitarian and pacifist deprecation of it, as well as the conception of war as a 'sad necessity' or a purely political or natural phenomenon - none if this corresponds to any tradition, all this is but modern fabrication, born yesterday, as a side-effect of the decomposition of the democratic and materialistic civilization against which, today, new revolutionary forces are rising up. In this sense, everything which we have gathered from a great variety of sources, constantly separating the essential from the contingent, the spirit from the letter, can be used by us as an inner fortification, as a confirmation, as a strengthened certainty.
>>451055
>>450997
I'm seeing a lot of spiritual explanations for why we have war. A lot of anecdotal material. Historical evidence is only proving of past events. People liked war. People went to war. War brought down societies.
Has the amount of violence deescalated? The consequences of modern warfare have increased the stakes. Being destructive on a larger scale.
But does all that history mean it won't decrease? That we wouldn't somehow decrease the frequency of such events? How could you completely discount the possibility? Isn't the organization of groups like the UN, European Union, all the other organizations advocating for change indicate a desired change in history or has it occurred in time before?
>>451121
you are right in that a major war between superpowers is exceedingly unlikely, barring some unforeseen disaster, but the whole world isn't as advanced as the west.
>>451121
Do you have evidence that that's possible? The only wars the UN has prevented have been hot wars between superpowers.
>>451121
>Has the amount of violence deescalated?
By the numbers, yes.
>The consequences of modern warfare have increased the stakes. Being destructive on a larger scale.
Ever was it thus
>That we wouldn't somehow decrease the frequency of such events? How could you completely discount the possibility? Isn't the organization of groups like the UN, European Union, all the other organizations advocating for change indicate a desired change in history or has it occurred in time before?
Big coalitions can reduce the frequency of wars, but if anything increase the scale of those events which do finally occur as the conflict propagates through the networks of alliance and trade. Only strong and truly global institutions will be of any use.
