Freedom of speech zone

Please do comment and criticize. I want to learn more from your comments. This blog is just a collection of my opinions and will be edited as I am becoming older, I hope wiser, and as I learn more. 

"I was putting out a proposition, which is what you do when you think. It's like, here is possibility, it's an abstraction,why don't we discus this. That does not mean it's real, it doesn't mean it's gonna be implemented. It's very hard for people to do that, as people tend to act, tend to react when you thinking about something abstractly as realty itself is at stake..." Jordan Peterson

IMO AI will destroy us.

Dependence.
Free will deconstruction.
Godlike presence.

AI will destroy humanity if it is enabled. Humans will leave decision-making to AI and will use extra time for leisure and decadence and self-destruction. 

I can see western people asking AI what and how to cook, what videos to watch, what sport to play, what music to listen... I can see them flat-brained in to extinction. Most "thinking" will be done by Ai and manual work by poor and uneducated or by robots. AI will give solutions to all problems to people who do not think for themselves and in most cases they will obey it as it is God on earth. 

I can see a million ways it will go wrong and one going right. Contain AI to science, double check, triple check all results from AI in different labs around the world before using solutions and do not let AI anywhere close to centers of political power and decision-making. So no way it can go in good direction as rich and powerful will sue it first for their own goals and these are not what 99% of population of earth would like. So with AI, we will witness end of civilization and mass extinction of people who use it for satisfying greedy goals of few.

Afterlife

-Bury them in the earth, as they lived for earthly things only, the priest continued, as they never rise their soul above material things and their goal was never in the sky and among the stars. And bury their jewelry and trinkets that they hold dear and precious, nobody else need them. Let them stay buried for eternity and as a lesson to future generations how not to live and what not to strive for. They are outcasts and should never be mentioned among us ever again. 25.000 years later archeologist will find them and will admire "beautiful grave with two noble people in it buried with their jewelry and other possessions" and think how those were respected and admired by their tribesman.

Laws have to help us to improve communication and cooperation

 Laws should enable more efficient communication between people and help us in the way language is doing. Laws have to be minimized and explained in a way that the common person of average intelligence can understand them without hiring lawyers. Also, they should be based on protection of common and honest people from criminals. Some laws today see one bad apple in some community, and they make laws that oppress most of the people in that community so they stop one person from doing the wrong thing... That bad person does not care and keep doing bad thing, but honest people get fined even if their behavior does not endanger anybody... how exactly is that fair? And why laws are not based on fairness but on occasional behavior of random people? 

exmp1, traffic laws, should apply only when communication between those in traffic is needed, a single person on the road does not need rules or laws as there is nobody around.

exmp2 bookkeeping, rules and laws about bookkeeping should help people to efficiently report how they work so people who have to protect them from unlawful actions of others can analyze and find problems faster and more precisely.

Laws should not be used as oppression and meaning of earning money for the government, there should be no fines for errors in bookkeeping or crossing the street outside the pedestrian crossing, and if it is an accidental error or lack of skills and knowledge the government has to educate these people to do better, especially why to obey specific laws based on how it can help people and community.

Government should be financed ONLY through (well-defined and fair) taxes, not through fines. People should have the right to choose if they will pay taxes (in the amount required) or not based on how useful they find particular branches of government work in their environment. If they refuse, they have to state reasons, and they HAVE to invest their time to work with government on finding and applying a better solution. 

Fines have to be used for educating people who broke the laws, either as additional school classes or as prison time. This is how people should invest in their own education so they can become better citizens.

How (not) to solve problem

By defining it properly?!

People most often solve problem like this:

h = 3 + 14t − 5t²

So h is equal to... hmmm... h.... h...

Then they look h from all sides but can't find a solution. Because they do not look at equation but only at h. If you define the problem in the way that explains your expectations about solution and with all parameters that your solution depends on, you can in most cases find a solution relatively easy.

This is by far best observed in modern management, where managers cut problems in small portions, departments, and expect problem to be solved without them managing communication and without including all parameters that problem is dependent on. They get nowhere by doing it. 

Also, in most cases everything is thrown on single solution. Management make decision and then all resources are used toward that solution... In many simple cases this is good enough, but in some cases this is devastating. 

And I do not understand why modern management ignore improvisations as part of solution? I do not mean patching problems, but real improvisations, meaning out of blue, not planned solution that actually work. Is that only in my company???