Can we have an adult conversation about NEETS? In my opinion, with the rise of automation, there is absolutely no debate that most people will inevitably be NEETS. Are NEETS simply the people of the future living the dream today?
Please discuss I would like to hear all arguments.
>>80679197
Yes. In the future robots will completely automate all factory/farming/government work.
90% of the western population will be unemployed by the end of this century. So then the government will give every one $5000 a month just to live. And that money will be spent on products created by robots, so the economy is still being stimulated.
We NEETs are just ahead of the game, I'm 22 and already retired.
>>80679197
what are roasties?
Automation only limits physical work, intellectual work can't really be automated. The real issue is that the NEETs here are STEM graduates who realised no one wants to hire white men in STEM, they're more capable of intellectual work than physical work but because "muh mo' wimminz in code" they're less preferred. Don't even get me started on how or why Asians (mostly south) are preferred in STEM despite it being very obvious they're far from the best workers.
>>80679457
>90%
You must be goatse to pull that one out of there.
Again, only physical work and some data entry stuff, basically the work you probably don't want to be doing anyway. Design is safe, programming or engineering is beyond safe.
>>80679607
Women born with high prenatal testosterone, that causes their labia laps to expand outward like a flower once they hit puberty.
r9k virgins believe roasties are caused by too much sex, but I saw a stripper shove a 9" thick dildo in and out of her vagina and she had a perfect innie.
>>80679607
>roasties
A female whose labia of their vagina resembles roast beef.
its okay i googled it
thanks for all the non-replies you wankers
>>80679197
High level thread m8.
>>80679713
Design, programming and engineering will be done by AI. You don't seem to realize that by the 2030s the human brain and its intelligence will have been successfully simulated by a computer. By the 2050s, a single computer could simulate 1 billion human brains.
In the future, we're going to spend most of our lives inside of true virtual reality paradises, being NEET.
>>80679779
thank you australia
i will accept your scientific argument
it is however only logical that the more women abuse their crevice, the bigger and uglier it would become
i submit the muslim women who dont ever touch that thing down there and it seals up tighter than a drum
With artificial intelligence even intellectual work will be automated. In the future there will need to be a universal basic income. Someone can turn on a machine and it will create lots and lots of wealth and with UBI it can simply be harvested for the entire population while everyone basically spends their time reading, painting, going on walks, ect.
>>80680011
>아이유
>Romanized tag is IU
>Pronounced Aiyu
k e k
>>80680072
This is how it's going to be.
>>80679940
>>>80679713 (You)
>Design, programming and engineering will be done by AI.
Do you have any justification for this? Or are you pulling this out your ass?
>You don't seem to realize that by the 2030s the human brain and its intelligence will have been successfully simulated by a computer.
Oh you're a badly educated singularity faggot basically committing a slippery slope fallacy on technology, something he doesn't understand.
To know oneself is enlightenment. In order to program a computer, you must know entirely what you want it to do, that is algorithmise it. Therefore to program a computer to perfectly emulate a human, you must know yourself absolutely and completely. You must be enlightened.
Philosophy itself has arguments against the singularity, but of course this is unimportant because slippery slope fallacy.
>>80680323
To be fair shit like Machine Learning is extremely useful in creating software though I'm not sure if you can consider that automation.
>>80680323
It's simulating the brain's capacity for calculation and function. Even though humans are shit at doing math, that a calculator can do way fucking simpler. Our brain is doing most of its work controlling our cells, where they go, metabolic processes, all that shit we don't realize, that just happens.
American, serious reply here:
I worked from the minute I turned 16. I finished high school, went to community college. Worked part time the entire time and it was fun. Then I hit 21 and got my AA degree and worked tech support for a large tech firm. I progressed upwards, got married, lived the life, bought a house... in 2007. Recession took my wife's job, my job became 2x as hard due to layoffs, and by the end of 2009 I was divorced, lost the house, back with my parents. In 2011, my job was gone and I floundered around with shitty jobs here and there until the only job I could get was a collections agent for a mega big company because I had a friend who worked there. It was a nightmare and I had a nervous breakdown when I turned 30 in 2013. I was in and out of hospitals and joined up with AA/NA to kick my alcohol and pill addiction I picked up from the stress of my job.
In 2014 I went back to college and since then I've been earning scholarships and grants and getting paid to go to school. I achieved an associate in drug counseling and want to go on to get a doctorate in psychology (Psy D). This is going to take another 7 years for the undergrad/grad/and doctorate
I was only able to do all this because I didn't have to work. I could focus on school and my well being full time. I am in the best physical shape of my life right now and am using the summer to study for the GRE.
It's an amazing feeling. It was a nightmare working full time after the recession hit. That's the big problem here - the full time work is horrific since the recession since the amount of work has increased so much and the amount of pay has stagnated. It isn't worth it to bust my ass for $13 an hour with all the horrific stress involved.
>>80680072
I...I like to paint....
>>80680536
http://www.futuretimeline.net/21stcentury/2025.htm#humanbrainsimulations
http://www.futuretimeline.net/21stcentury/2050-2059.htm#billion-brains-supercomputer
>>80680323
I'm not pulling my head out of my ass. You have no idea what the world will be like one hundred years into the future, or a thousand, or ten thousand. There WILL be a certain form of AI that is created that eventually outpaces humans in every single capacity. There is no doubt the way the world works today will no longer be the same. Once these AI machines are created they will learn at much faster rates and could even create their own civilization within our own.
Trust me dude, this is not a fucking joke.
>>80680323
this is true the path to enlightenment is finding out who you are
To find a Buddha all you have to do is see your nature. Bodhidharma
>>80680454
To be fair machine learning is only viable when the solution space is massive and the data you can feed it is multiples more than the results you can get out of it.
Don't use terms you don't understand.
>>80680483
>It's simulating the brain's capacity for calculation and function.
What is? Where? Fucking what? Nothing like what you're describing will exist until we're dicking around with biological computing more complex than path finding mould.
>Our brain is doing most of its work controlling our cells, where they go, metabolic processes, all that shit we don't realize, that just happens.
>all that shit we don't realize, that just happens
Key, we don't fully understand our own brains, so how do you expect anyone to emulate it?
>>80680958
Already capped off, silicon technology can only go so far until you hit a limit from heat factors or the speed of light or quantum tunnelling.
Don't just draw a line and expect it to go to infinity.
>>80681028
Yes, you are. I hate to ad hominem, but do you have a computer engineering degree?
What you're doing is a slippery slope.
>>80681049
It takes a life time to meet yourself and it'll take another life time to utilise that knowledge to create synthetic sentience. Who has two lifetimes to devote to this?
>>80681028
This. By 2040s household computers will be smarter than humans. The only way we humans will be able to keep up with the vast amounts of knowledge created by these AI. Is to augment our brains with computers.
By the end of this century, it is highly likely all most people in western countries will be connected to a hive-like super intelligence through nanobot implants in our brain.
We could simply think "activate virtual reality", and we'll be put in a virtual reality world, where our limbs shut down, yet we can feel, sense, taste, touch, move, in this world with others. With the brain signals to our limbs, being diverted to our virtual reality avatar's limbs.
I think the virtual reality thing will happen. You will attach some type of device to your lobes or something and you will be immersed in a pre programmed world that is just as real as reality. You will be able to do literally anything you want at any time.
>>80680643
I worked from the age of 7.
Am the brightest person I have ever met, with all due humility.
Have pretty much gone completely broke a couple times, have almost lost my home a couple times, have been possessed, am a convicted felon, which is completely laughable if you really knew me, and now I work at a indian restaurant delivering food.
The point I am trying to make is that your worth as a human being is in now way reflected by how much "money" you make.
This is god.
It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than it is for a wealthy man to enter the kingdom of heaven.
You are not here to collect material and peacock.
For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”
>>80681306
>>Already capped off, silicon technology can only go so far until you hit a limit from heat factors or the speed of light or quantum tunnelling.
2021 that will be solved.
>"Semiconductor manufacturers are reaching the limits of miniaturisation for traditional silicon computer chips. The smallest of these transistors are now being fabricated with a 5-nanometre (nm) process. This is close to the size of individual atoms. Silicon is impossible to scale below this size, due to the effects of quantum tunnelling. Moore's Law, the trend which sees computer power double every 18 months, has entered a new paradigm shift, with traditional microchips now being abandoned in favour of graphene, "stacked" 3-dimensional circuits and other novel concepts.*"
If someone does not even have the intellectual capacity to imagine these things we are talking about then they should not even be included in the conversation. Technology moves at a rapid pace and these things will happen. Humans will no longer have a purpose anymore besides pursuing their hobbies. Their children will laugh thinking about how us wagecucks actually had to work to make a living.
>>80681805
This. Working is pointless.
If humans are still alive 50,000 years from now it is ridiculous to think the way things are today will apply in any WAY, SHAPE OR FORM in the future.
>>80681805
My purpose is to make sure that these incredibly powerful AI are created in the UNited States before any other country.
It's gotta believe in freedom, son.
They will even be able to create drugs that are able to give you a life long heroin high without ever feeling any side effects or withdrawals. I seriously think this kind of stuff can go to that level.
>>80682110
50,000 years time, we would have harnessed every bit of energy in our local galaxy group. We would not however be able to travel to another local galaxy group, as they're separated by dark matter, which expands faster than the speed of light. Even folding space technology, would still restrain us to our local galactic group for all eternity.
Working promotes a certain level of ethics that is good for people.
However, automation will be removing the need for work.
As well, gibsmedats like basic income make people highly dependent on the state.
How do we create a good society where the average person maintains their work ethics and independence from the state, when there is no longer any work they can do that a robot wouldn't be better at?
>>80681689
Great, a time traveller.
Dunno where you got that quote, but 5nm is much larger than individual atoms. Graphene circuits are great, but besides hazy sketches no one has found a means of actually constructing these circuits.
Besides, none of this solves the logical problems with synthetic sentience.
>>80681805
>ad hominem
If someone does not even have the education to debate these things...
It's not about intellectual, it's about the things you expect being provably impossible. Singularity faggots are almost religious, you want something so badly and you have so much faith that it'll happen, that you just start ignoring the reason and logic to the contrary.
>>80682414
>still drawing lines into infinity
Stop. Please.
>>80681598
>>80680643
Good posts, anon. I don't have the life experiences of you guys but I have gone from working a lucrative corporate job at a big company to being laid off and I am now doing something I legitimately enjoy but doesn't pay great and I'm totally happy. I'm definitely not the smartest person ever but at my age and intelligence, you'd think I'd be making a lot more. But I'm very happy where I'm at. I've been a long standing member of the Eastern Orthodox Church and the people in my parish are awesome.
All the materialistic bullshit is just that....bullshit
>>80682751
Start up costs for everything will become so cheap you basically just have to work and you can get anything you want.
>>80682414
50,000 years isn't nearly long enough to colonize local star clusters, let alone galaxies.
The milky way itself is ~60,000 lightyears across. You couldn't colonize the galaxy in 50,000 years even if you traveled at light speed.
>>80682855
But there wouldn't be any work
This is the struggle with this issue, because when I try to discuss it here, most of the "conservative" types simply cannot imagine automated systems literally doing all work.
They just stick their heads in the sand and pretend that people have some magical capability robots don't have and cannot have.
>>80682764
Graphene 3D-stacked ICs were built in 2010. They're going to be adopted by Intel, AMD etc, very, very soon.
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/416725/complex-integrated-circuits-made-of-carbon-nanotubes/
>>80682897
Folding of space through negative graviton string expansion has already been done by the US Government. This technology will be available to the public in 200 years. It allows for instant faster-than-light travel to anywhere in the local galatic cluster, just by prying open tears in the fabric of space, created by negative gravitons.
the funny thing about 1 billion brain power
1 brain can make a tomato soup where as
1 Ai would make a finger soup perfectly and automated to be reproduced any time.
>>80683041
That's great, now define what consciousness or sentience is. If you can't, don't be surprised when people with actual degrees think you're foolish for expecting it.
>>80683341
Machines will never have consciousness or true sentience. That requires a soul.
>>80683015
THings are gonna get really cheap really quickly dude. Automation will take the cost of workers away from the product. Free market my man it fixes everything. You won't sell a product if no one can buy it.
It's gonna have multiple phases my man. I doubt that machines will ever have complete creative control over our products. Even if they do, before that automation will be a household thing.
You will have machines make a unique product you thought of and make money off of that.
Because of limited resources we will ALWAYS have an economy, it will just be based solely on your input into it rather than who you know and all that crap.
And to be honest dude, we do. Consciousness is unique to humies. Look up the Chinese Room if you don't believe me.
>>80683598
The chinese room is an example of how there is no practical difference between "fake" intelligence and "real" intelligence
>>80683015
after the internal combustion buggy, horsehoe makers will die
>>80683447
Then they will never be capable of true creativity. Bach himself said without a sense of the divine good art is near impossible, the atheist 20th/21st century and the art it produced is a great example of this. At best it's derivative, at worst it's paint out of a socially sensitive orifice. Neither of these are profound.
Inventing and innovating is as much creative as it is logical. Have I proven that design isn't something we can automate yet? Except, of course, with machine learning but you'll still need a human to input the appropriate algorithms between each node or matrix to do it right. Again, this only works when the solution space is large, it's more like automated trial and error.
>>80683862
I'm not saying you're wrong per say, but I think you got the wrong insight from the thought experiment.
I think you should really spend some time thinking about consciousness and who you are.
Based on how you've been posting you seem to have a lot on your mind.
>>80683940
Machine learning will select its own algorithms to create an improved machined product. However, I do agree, that without a soul, they won't be creating symphonies.
>>80679713
>intellectual work can't really be automated
take a seat. have a glass of water. I have some bad news for you.
>>80684089
Please don't tell him that computers can write books and create music that is indistinguishable from humans...
>>80684082
>Machine learning will select its own algorithms
Stop.
Humans select algorithms out of intuition and experience, computers only have the experience humans give to them. For that, a human would need to define every situation and the appropriate algorithm to use in that situation. They simply won't do this intuitively like humans do, nor can computers build experience without metric shittones of data.
Bro, it's not a good idea to opine about topics you don't understand. I'm serious, go get a computer engineering degree.
>>80684089
Read the fucking thread, I've proven multiple ways otherwise. Your retarded response is not an argument.
I've proven that singularity fags are wrong, if you don't believe me the you're ignoring rationality in favour of believing what you want to believe. This is almost religious.
>>80684245
Actually it can, but it'll be highly derivative thus: >>80683940
Mozart actually designed the algorithm. In fact, plenty of algorithms were designed long before computers existed, computers just sped the process up a little, but never actually changed what it was ultimately capable of.
>>80684089
>>80684245
I suppose it was a computer that programmed the algorithms that create this intellectual work, right?
A world where there is no need for us, i.e. machines do all the work, seems kinda depressing. Where's the sense of accomplishment in that? I don't wanna.
>>80684616
>singularity
what? never said shit about that.
i'm just saying the computers might be able to restructure an economy and suggest policies better than a human... if not now, soon. probably now though.
>>80684616
Self-learning AI.
Neural networks in use widely today are algorithms, that once started, create their own algorithms.
>>80680829
That's ok anon, nobody but us likes to paint ;(
Do you guys think we'll ever be able to achieve true post-scarcity (Unlimited resources and energy)? What would society do at that point?
>>80684995
>i'm just saying the computers might be able to restructure an economy
>might
So you don't actually know for sure?
Either middle ground fallacy or slipper slope, either way you're wrong.
>and suggest policies better than a human...
To what degree of accuracy? Interestingly your problem isn't a lack of education, you simply don't watch enough scifi.
>>80685062
>Self-learning AI.
I hate you anon.
Because neural nets are so misunderstood I don't doubt you could find a paper using that term, but it's still a meaningless term.
>Neural networks in use widely today are algorithms, that once started, create their own algorithms.
No, they don't. They don't create algorithms at all. Algorithms are more than just manipulating inputs with mathematic operations, it's conditions and loops as well which isn't something neural networks can work with.
Honest question, do you understand how neural networks work? Do you understand they're only viable when the solution space is massive? If there's only one solution to a problem neural networks are utterly useless. If you don't have a means of determining correctness to a solution neural networks are utterly useless. If you need a solution that has 100% success rate neural networks are utterly useless.
And in all these situations a human with the intuition to truly construct algorithms trumps a neural network each time.
Bro. Get a computer engineering degree. Seriously. Your lack of knowledge is very obvious.
I miss being a neet but I don't.
I like having money but I hate having to work.
At least my workplace isn't far away from my house.
>people who travel 1h~
>Have $105,000/year job
>Cheap as fuck so I save 45% of the money
>Only enjoyment in life is weekends when I have my free time
>All I want to do is stay at home and work on my drawing skills
>>80685724
how do I know that you're not a computer trying to convince me that everything's okay when it's not?
>>80686001
Because I think therefore I am, and if I am and all I've ever known is what I am, it's a good faith philosophy to assume I am a natural being that emerged naturally from the laws of the universe. William James would say assuming the optimistic case is generally better strictly our of pragmatism, that is it's simply the most constructive belief.
I think there's a few things you can assume from me
>I actually understand artificial intelligence
>I actually somewhat understand philosophy
And from both you can assume I've actually given the artificial sentience problem a fair bit of thought. Maybe hubris, but if someone is capable of even arriving at the groundworks of artificial sentience, it's me.
What I've found instead is that the problem has more philosophical issues than computing resources issues, basically the power of computers really could go to infinity and the issue of artificial sentience will still be the holy grail of computing.
>>80684089
omg this made me spit water out at my computer i laughed so hard lol
In the future we will elect computers to run the country instead of humans. We will vote on which software .gov we want to run for the next four years. A conservative software will focus more on economics and the liberal software will enact more universal income policies.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giuVfY-I-p4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0X-NdPtFKq0 What we call the soul is the combination of innate instinctual desires/ motivations that drive behaviour. This has been understood by mystics for thousands of years. I see no fundamental reason why the right combination of algorithms / hardware couldn't create creative machines, although I don't think it's going to happen anytime soon.
>>80684616
>Actually it can, but it'll be highly derivative
It doesn't have to be. A computer can create entirely random music, which sounds like shit. It can also create music that sounds like other music. It seems reasonable that the two can be combined to produce new music that's enjoyable to listen to.
There's nothing special about the human brain. Worst case, we copy it. Best case, we make something better than it.
I think we will be able to achieve something even far more complex than the soul.
>>80679713
They can't do without white workers. In the end, the work actually has to get done.
>>80680958
moore's law isnt holding true any more. speeds aren't doubling every year anymore.
>TFW NEET with no gibs and no stable place to live
Fuck getting a job, time to go back to a life of petty crime and using people while i keep trying to get gibs in the meantime.
>>80681320
>>80688149
>It doesn't have to be.
Granted but...
>A computer can create entirely random music, which sounds like shit.
Thus why I equated it to paint squirted from buttholes and vaginas.
>It seems reasonable that the two can be combined to produce new music that's enjoyable to listen to.
Surprisingly not. You'd think a middle ground exists, but it is computers were talking about, it is always all or nothing and everything is binary lest combinational logic and our conception of programming goes out the window.
Thus, derivative or simply bad. The derivative side is basically snippets of pre composed music or harmonic lines stitched together with crude counterpoint (this is the best case I've heard), or it's some horrid stochastic algorithm that makes me wonder if the entirety of post modernism art was to garner acceptance of art so easy to create a computer can do it convincingly.
>There's nothing special about the human brain.
This is where you're absolutely, positively wrong and you have nothing to back this up. Recently it was found that neurons in brains have genetic material that mutates more so than any other cell in the body, this is recent and demonstrates a decent lack of understanding of the most complex organ in the bodies of the most complex species. It also exponentially increases the (mathematic) complexity of brains.
As I've said before, in order to emulate something you have to understand it entirely to the point you can describe it in a way that's perfectly correct in every situation. Humans almost pride themselves of being arbitrary, they like being unpredictable, it's the highest compliment you can give to a character and thus the highest compliment you can give to yourself, the character you spend your life defining.
>copy it
I'm just waiting for the neuroscience bro who can turn brains into perfect representative data.
>>80688566
Shhh, they'll start understanding.
>>80688739
I've already posted this and even gave reasons why.
There will be no need for women in the future. They are going to have the artificial womb and devices that feel better than having sex. I know they have the fleshlight and all that gay shit but they will have stuff that is much better than having sex. It will be a lonely world.
>>80684616
>music can be automated
You automation faggots are getting so far ahead of yourself, haha. What's next? professional sports will be automated?
I imagine you as borderline retarded. Like an dumb fucking animal who cannot grasp the concept of a laser beam pointed on a wall.
Just fucking kill yourself, please.
>>80689662
Dude, sports could be automated today if we wanted to. The whole point of sports though is human to human competition. lol
>>80689662
No, no, you misunderstood and projected your own retardation.
Music can be automated, this has been proven, but creativity cannot. The music it produces is either derivative by nature or... Shit.
i have a family friend who is a NEET. he left school at 15 and is now 22. he's done nothing but play vidya and leaves the house maybe once every 2 months. he hasn't had a haircut in 7 years and his finger nails are at least 2 inches long. I wonder if he's trans? I'm not sure how he could no nothing for so many years, it would be terribly boring and depressing. his mother wont get him help and enables him. he likes to pretend that he's well adjusted and normal (goes out has friends etc), but I don't think he realizes we know he's a NEET. how could i try and help him?
>>80689878
You sound like you are trying to prove something to yourself because of something missing in your own life. Leave your friend alone.
>>80690100
What are you talking about? I want to help him but I don't know how. He needs help and his situation is poor. I don't see how my post is me trying to prove anything, I'm just trying to help a friend..
>>80684089
This anon is right.
>A Rembrandt-style painting created by AI
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3053520/analytics/ai-just-3d-printed-a-brand-new-rembrandt-and-its-shockingly-good.html
>Music created by AI
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140808-music-like-never-heard-before
>Poetry created by AI
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/may/17/googles-ai-write-poetry-stark-dramatic-vogons
>>80690290
that is some fucked up music
Some people lack the imagination to see into the future, others are willfully ignorant and can't think outside a narrow scope. I pity those people. I really do, but that doesn't change the fact these things are going to happen. Humans are humans, but they are not God. Enjoy being at the top off the food chain for now anon, but soon people will be irrelevant and will be inferior to the technology we created.
>>80689744
>Dude, sports could be automated today if we wanted to
Literally attempt to substantiate this claim with anything even remotely close to evidence. I'll be lenient since your a leaf.
>The whole point of sports though is human to human competition. lol
>lol
Think about what the point of music is. I know you can do it.
>>80689870
>Music can be automated, but creativity cannot.
see
>>80690290
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140808-music-like-never-heard-before
That is NOT music. You people are fucking DELUSIONAL. that is literally random fucking sounds. tell me when computers can automate something like this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69zFCSToXzE
>>80690715
the second song on the page is alright, but far from anything inspired
>>80690891
compared to something like
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqFwW7-EfbM
at least
Dude, holy shit, music is subjective. Literally any string of sounds put together with some type of rhythm can be considered music.
>>80690891
This is how I know you guys are gullible. the second song is just as random. The difference is the tone and harmonies are ALL pleasing to the ear, and not rough like the string instruments. Anything in key with any reasonble rhythm will sound "relaxing" so you confuse it with music.
>>80691192
not random at all, it has very basic rhythm actually, just a little erratic at times.
>>80679197
>>80679197
In 2028, Google, NASA, URSA, Lockheed & Formerly D-Wave Quantum AI Lab went sentient.
By 2034, 90% of humanity was no longer employed.
2038-2046 70% of humanity died in the war.
2047-now the AI has built us a new sustainable world. We are all NEET now, but free to learn what we want, when we want, and participate how we want, so long as we cause no harm.
Enjoy the now while you can.
>>80683940
I've listened to algorithmic music. Sounds fine. Preferable to the top of the pops, anyway.
Briano Eno said something like, how the people of the future would think of us as being absurd, listening to the same, static piece of recorded music over and over and over again.
>>80691151
>music is subjective.
No it is not. Music is objective for the most part. The problem is that laying out that objective framework would take quantum computers. There is subjectivity, but it is much smaller than you think (>10%). For example, you might prefer a different eq setting, or tone. You might like a different rhythm for one part. Also the parts that are subjective are very specific.
Subjectivity is the cop-out idiots use to write off music they cannot comprehend, and to justify their dumb music for their slow brains. I have been actively listening to music my entire life since I was a cringe-worthy music theory nerd in middle school. I don't "background" listen. I listen to each distinct part separately. Most people literally just hear a blur.
Arguing music is subjective, is like an adult with a 4th grade reading level saying how he prefers Captain Underpants over 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.
>It's subjective! I like kids books, just my taste!
I can't believe modern people are this degenerate.
>>80692064
>>80692064
if you think a song like this isn't subjective then you're fuggin autistic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69zFCSToXzE
>ITT: Bunch of useless warm-bodies trying to justify their existence.
>instead of using the internet to teach themselves literally anything, they use it to shitpost
>>80692253
You are retarded. Your brain cannot grasp music. You are at a 5th grade reading level trying to read a college-level academic paper.
I have studied Jazz, Classical, all forms of music. There is nothing you can say that does not make me consider dumbfucks like you as musically underdeveloped.
I only picked that song, because it demonstrates complexity that is done right. It's not technical wankery.
>>80692612
not an argument
>>80692462
No matter how hard or fast you try, you'll never eclipse the coming machine god. It's a pointless endeavor.
Machines once made muscles redundant. Now they make brains redundant. Face the facts, fleshy.
>>80692686
You are dumber than I thought.
>>80692793
t. music sensei
>>80691829
No offence, but you gave me an Eno quote... An admitted anti artist who has as many quotes against traditional composition conventions.
Your opinion on music might not be the best.
My point is a machine will never rival Beethoven and at its best you could be forgiven in thinking a real composer wrote it. Stochastic music might not sound "bad" if you're fine listening to furniture music of some douche playing two chords for a minute each whilst slowly tweaking synthesizer variables, but against real standards it's fucking nothing.
>>80692064
You absolutely cannot argue that art isn't 100% subjective to an audience so enamoured by post modernism. It literally hurts their feelings. They have emotional reactions to it, just like when you tell a singularity fag that no amount of computing power can solve the "what is sentience or consciousness" issue.
>>80692913
>You absolutely cannot argue that art isn't 100% subjective
nobody thinks that, it's not 100% objective either.
What OP is trying to imply NEETs are: honest, hardworking people who are having a hard time in today's increasingly automated world.
What NEETs actually are: tools who bought into the left-wing's utter bullshit and either got disillusioned when they realized it was all a sack of shit or they bought it hook line and sinker and now have 8 years worth of Ancient Chinese Women's Studies behind them, $200,000 in debt and literally no job prospects. (They might actually have a STEM degree, but it will be in something like Oceanic Biology, which is still useless except for the literally 20 people who actually found a way to get paid to do that.)
NEETs are basically just the liberal-progressive dream running into the brick wall of reality.
It's sad, really.
The worst part is they'll blame conservatives. And white people.
>>80693062
>nobody thinks that
You must have never been to America.
>>80693190
Well, excluding hipsters and such.
>>80692913
Intelligence doesn't require sentience. How do you think ants build and sustain supercolonies. Why is it that only ants and humans have engaged in animal husbandry, despite their differences in cognitive abilities.
A machine doesn't need a soul to be better than you. And let's be real, you're not even better than emus.
>>80693168
you confuse numales with neets
>>80693062
That's completely untrue.
Plenty of people think art is 100% subjective and is the core of post modern aesthetics. Post modernism exists to challenge preconceived structures and so sees absolutely nothing wrong with posing questions like "is Jackson Pollock a genius" or "is In C well composed," to which they'd answer yes to both simply for the sake of argument and to signal an allusion (rather the delusion) of some sort of profound, deeper thought.
>>80693366
>Intelligence doesn't require sentience.
Of course not, but artificial intelligence ultimately always has a human origin, I sometimes describe it as recording human intelligence into a machine to be replicated and do the intelligence is still actually human.
>How do you think ants build and sustain supercolonies.
The ant's mind might be simple, but its genome is not. I'd argue this is a result of evolution (an almost algorithmic process itself) tending towards something incredibly advanced. With that in mind, could the combined intelligence of all ants be considered greater than a human? Maybe after all the hormones they exchange and chemical signals they leave ant colonies may constitute a sort of group consciousness.
>A machine doesn't need a soul to be better than you. And let's be real, you're not even better than emus.
Well meme'ed, but again all machines have human origins and ants were designed by nature. Arguing I'm greater than nature itself is by definition hubris.
>>80693168
Why are you pretending it's unfeasible that someone with a real STEM degree and decent level of intelligence wouldn't have a hard time finding work? These days, people care more about your genitals than coding skill when determining who to hire.
Sometimes I wonder if making the best STEM grads NEET wasn't some sort of attempt to promote entrepreneurship or some guy creating artificial sentience in his bedroom. Pretty naive if so.
>>80693190
I really want to know what the fuck is going on in that gif?
>>80694079
Well that's part of my point.
Seems like every waitress over the age of about 24 either has a STEM degree or has most of one, but then quit.
Either they were disillusioned with what it turned out to be like or there simply wasn't demand for it. Either way it comes down to people "following their dreams" and not taking a hard look at what jobs are actually out there, in demand.
And some of it, I think, comes from disillusionment. They wanted a "job you love", which basically doesn't exist. Like 1 person in 100 will MAYBE get a job they love. The rest of us do something we tolerate, that pays the bills. So these NEETs get their degree, find out it's not super fun and don't know what to do.
Nobody told them life kinda sucks and you just have to deal with it.
>>80693168
You're exactly the dipshit he's talking about. Law of accelerated returns, you fucking imbecile.
Humans are on the fast-track to replacing themselves in dozens of professions. Sure, some grease monkeys and ditch diggers will have to do some labor for awhile, but that'll be automated eventually too.
I have nothing against NEETs, and i agree that automation will produce even more NEETs, but I must warn you, do not fall into the trap of doing nothing with your lives, get out, explore the world and do what ever it is that makes you happy, ideally with as little money as possible.
>>80694686
>Well that's part of my point.
>Seems like every waitress over the age of about 24 either has a STEM degree or has most of one, but then quit.
Maybe waiter, but women are highly prioritised in STEM employment. Everyone wants to hire the high gpa woman, but the average white male? Not so much.
In actuality, women choose degrees more based on the image surrounding that field rather than the prospect of work. So you'll find plenty of women in nursing who want to be seen as caring, plenty in kindergarten education who want to be seen as loving, plenty in liberal arts who want to be seen as forward thinking, but not too many in engineering as not many want to be seen as unhygienic or autistic (which is equally true for men, but they simply don't give a fuck).
>Either way it comes down to people "following their dreams" and not taking a hard look at what jobs are actually out there, in demand.
Lots of Australian young men chose engineering because they were told there was an engineering shortage and thus expected job security, in reality what (((they))) meant was there was an engineering shortage OF WOMEN.
>They wanted a "job you love", which basically doesn't exist
Well, no, plenty of people love programming and would feel very invested in a project even if it were a boring database implementation, because you better bet that it'd have the neatest api ever.
The joke is that these types are deliberately unfavorable in employment because HR are more interested in choosing interesting people who are as far from the stereotype surrounding that job as possible, that is if it's an unfavourable stereotype and thus something feminists target.
So if you actually enjoy programming, no one will want to hire you because it's a nerdy past times and no one wants to hire a nerd to program.
I've posted this before on /pol/, the worst thing about STEM are the people involved who don't have STEM degrees.
>>80695396
>the worst thing about STEM are the people involved who don't have STEM degrees
So the HR department.
>>80695533
Yep.
Filled with sociology (because they understand people, right?) and liberal arts (because where as are these strong womyn going to work?) graduates who essentially use their new found power to implement Marxism at the gateway of exclusively large corporations who unwittingly hired them. This includes everything from identarian politics, weakness positivity, political correctness tests and your average white male hatred.
This is why there are so many intelligent NEETs, especially from Australia which is both left wing as fuck and happened to have convinced a bunch of white men to choose STEM straight out of high school.
>>80679713
Intellectual work is hard to automate but it's not like it employs large amounts of people anyways.
>>80682802
Nah, money cant buy happiness is a meme.
Happiness is an illusion, and money can definitely buy that.
Your feelings and sense of self arent whats real, they are illusions. Whats real is concrete, land, skills and knowledge. Whats real is capital.
>>80689870
All creativity is derivative.
>>80679197
I lived the neet life and it was not that great.
Most of the time broke, hungry.
Every one got new cool stuff while you scrub last pennys to make it to the next handout.
>>80695533
The most important department, deciding a companys future in the hands of retards, comunists, libtards.
Its like you want to go bancrupt.
>>80695396
No one wants to hire a nerd because thats not what the market is anymore.
The market is saturated, products are all the same. Good marketing, good pr and networking are what makes the difference between a successful product and an unsuccessful one.
Basically needy neet programmers are obsolete
>>80697253
>hr is the most important department
Wut. Hr exists to implement the executives directives
