🌸🌹2ck 🌱🐇 @2ck@social.cleverlibre.org

@soup_reviews dropping the mstdn forward?

I'm thinking about an "Osmosis Jones"-type story, but as an allegory for communism. Could show the potentially positive aspects in a human society (e.g., working towards a common goal) and the deleterious ones (e.g., subjugation of individual liberty, and even one's own life, in service of societal goals). Like, all of the cells (people) are working towards keeping the body alive, but it's the body of a rapacious murderer.

This doesn't extend to metaphors about individualistic society very well though: within a body, that kind of thing is typically cancer. Maybe that makes sense though *from* the communist perspective?

@zpartacoos I would expect governments (or at least my government) to regulate that a vehicle capable of making such tradeoffs must minimize overall expected loss of life > injury > property damage. So, it's not that people even have the choice: AVs are just vehicles that try to minimize harm (or maximize survivability...I think those can be different things, but not sure at this moment how to distinguish more closely). The code for the vehicles can be signed and verified so that user-customizations can be identified and, if they don't adhere to the spirit of the harm-reduction regulation, the responsible party can be fined, jailed, or whatever.

I would also push back on the description of such optimizations as "black and white": my whole point is that they are not. The autonomous system is always optimizing *multiple* variables which include potential loss of life and other potential harms, but also travel time and ride quality. It has to be that way or all the cars would stay parked (safest that way) or go so slow no one would use them.

I'm thinking about "trolley problems" for autonomous vehicles...I'm thinking that a practical system would only degenerate to the classical trolley problem in a very few cases, but for the most part, you'd just design the system to maximize survivability of crashes for all observable or inferred humans and then, fixing that solution, to minimize property damage. Early on, you'd just have all humans classified the same. From there, you'd have a model based on size of the human or
(median human in, say, a structure you can't "see" inside).

@coldwave i wouldn't call it unpleasant... I wouldn't call it pleasant either. I found it humorous in a weird way

@coldwave did you ever read/start reading Infinite Jest? I recall you posted about it before. it has some characters i guess you'd call queer. not exactly favorable portrayals, but most of the characters are bizarre in one way or another

@izaya i see. well my other suggestions are literally jokes. i tend to get my cheap earbuds packaged with other stuff

I'll bet at least one child was born in Africa last week after a difficult delivery and named "Evergiven"

@izaya why not get some good Sony headphones? they won't be that cheap, but they'll be well made

@jk i don't get why all of them "can't drive" what is "driving"?