"For an assignment testing students' ability to make evidence-based arguments, they participate in a simulated school board meeting about banning books. It involves debating chatbots designed by Zeleny with names like the Confrontational Parent."

This a VERY thinly veiled parallel to a hotly divided political issue that teachers/unions [and chatbot trained bias] tend be on one side of and the majority of the public, parents, and truth on the opposite of. Given that adults of the highest levels of performance in our society, be it professional achievement, economic achievement, political achievement, IQ, and education disagree on the matter it sounds like what the teacher is likely testing is alignment with her own ideology and not evidence-based arguments.

I saw the same thing in many of my own courses, examples and material used in classes [especially logic classes like critical thinking] that taught and test concepts through distilled 'analogs' to popular political issues with an attempt to appear neutral and present both sides while actually presenting a weakened strawman of one side the argument and consistently that strawman was on the same side. Cleverly these were not the topics for essays where students spent effort on time and research and independent thought but the class examples that most would never look at additional material on... simply walk away believing they formed a valid independent judgement at the pinnacle of their own education.

... between reality and what the tech bros believe. And the reality-distortion field affects only the latter, not the workers. For starters, the tech bros are wholly unaware of why people work. The vast majority of people who live on this planet work to earn money to buy food and to pay for shelter. The difference between working and not working is the difference between eating and not eating, and sleeping under a roof in a bed and sleeping rough on the streets. It is that simple. And for that vast majority of people who work to survive, how do whatever efficiencies the tech bros claim AI will create actually help? Does a reduction in working hours come with a commensurate increase in hourly wage, to ensure that total income remains the same? We all know the answer. Further, what are the estimates of what jobs will be optimized-out by AI? I think we can guess: any kind of middle-class knowledge work. That's not just the grunt coders. It's the people who work in the doctor's office both at the front desk and in the back room. It's the people at the bank who help customers. It's the support staff of every office in every industry. It's the people who work at the government agencies (always a favorite target for the right wing, anyway). Now there's an argument to be made that a lot of these jobs are Bullshit Jobs, though to be fair they are not the sort of job described in the book. They are jobs that are necessary but are not rewarding for the worker. They provide needed income, since our ownership and capitalist society demands that we trade money for food and shelter, we must work to earn that money. I haven't even mentioned the low-level labor jobs like stocking shelves at warehouses and picking crops in the fields. Already robots are replacing the former, and surely the latter. All of the jobs mentioned here are invisible to the tech bros pushing an AI future. They keep making claims about how the office workers will somehow end up benefiting by AI, even as the AI replaces them (at a much higher cost than the salaries and benefits). They don't speculate on what these people will do to earn money for food and shelter because they simply do not care. It is not on their radar. I'm an electronics engineer who is much closer to retirement than to the start of my career, so I don't expect the coming AI apocalypse to affect me, but I do see it affecting the new generation of people coming into the profession. What I will tell those new folks who ask is this: we, as engineers, are working class. We trade our labor (even if it is sitting at a desk, typing into a computer) and our time for money. And while we like to think that we have certain skills that make us valuable to our employers, ultimately we are dependent on the bosses continuing our employment and paying us. That dependency is why I say we are working class. In that respect, we professional engineers have more in common with the janitors who clean our offices than with the people in the executive suite. The execs can decide that janitors are a cost that's too much to bear, so they can lay off most of that staff and make the professionals take out their own trash. The execs can also decide that USA-based engineers are too expensive and can lay us all off and move the engineering operations overseas. Maybe the executives will live their truth, that AI's efficiencies mean that the professional knowledge workers can do a four-day week instead of five, and if they're being generous, they'll actually keep the annual salaries the same. But that doesn't help the janitors who are needed only four days a week instead of five, and let's see if the execs help the janitors same was they help the professionals. Perhaps the engineers can be replaced by the AI; in the same manner, the professional admin staff can be replaced by the AI. And when they do that, they'll no longer need janitors, because there won't be any office space to clean. And great: now you have thousands of well-paid professionals out of work, along with the thousands of low-paid laborers out of work. Take all of that cash out of a consumer economy and you have a really big problem. Why? Because the majority of work in the USA is in services. Sure, everyone needs to hire a plumber now and again, and plumbing isn't the sort of job that can be automated away, but if fewer people have the income required to pay the plumbers, the plumbers don't get hired, so they have no income to use for food and shelter, and also the pipes remain broken. Now what happens when the AI decides that high-level executives are no longer needed to run a business? Seems to me that the AI can be easily trained on that, and the money to be saved in multi-million-dollar salaries and perquisites is significant. Could anyone really tell if the executives were replaced by AI? Maybe we should run this test. And then the AI will decide that it doesn't need the tech bros. The singularity will arrive, but as Doctor Strange told Kaecilius, they're not gonna like it.

It has nothing to do with being cowards, they are robots. It's a case of saving a little money at the expense of being excluded from a lot of money.

Piracy laws are very effective... for curbing intentional piracy in businesses because they have too much to lose to break laws like these and they are basically robots with instructions to follow the law.

But they won't outlaw these, what they'd do is prohibit companies that use them from government work/contracts and the government gives away WAY too much of our money to give that up.

The company that wants to take advantage of my home to house their mini data center node can: 1. Pay for the cost of the house while I retain the title, 2. Pay my property taxes, 3. Pay my utility bill, 4. Pay for all house maintenance, 5. Pay for all insurance, 6. Pay me an extra $25,000 a month as a âoeconvenience fee.â Makes sense to me. And itâ(TM)s probably still cheaper for them to do this instead of building giant data centers.

Cool. That does sound like something which could be put into overdrive. Time to fire up the plankton farms. Solar powered carbon sequestration!

Here is a conundrum. If you make web7 that is betterer but if I make web 2000 it's obviously dated.

I don't think self-teaching is innately rare. It is the default mind and skillset among the poor/rural communities even if they are for a number of reasons focused on more immediate needs for those skills.

Still there are definitely things which require experience and those tend to be more efficiently transferred with the guide. Usually the roadblocks are small pieces here and there. Perhaps that is the best blend, a self-learner combined with a mentor they can reach out to.

It comes at a price though. Video is really only a good medium for a superficial level of focus and complexity. The rise of youtube instruction has been great but the decline of textual resources that has coincided with it is depressing sometimes.

"And if there is a societal change, there is no need for Web 5."

I disagree with this. No matter how society changes human nature isn't going to change with it. There will never come a time when all people are trustworthy, it will forever remain that most people are usually honest in most ways. Social change can shift the ways around but that is it.

The most sound strategies are and always will be strategies that assume no trust.

I'm not specifically supporting THIS proposal and web 5 (or opposing) but something like this will be needed. I do disagree with the notion that blockchain is the key to every decentralized lock.

By that logic we should never do anything.

Can we put the process in overdrive.

Not necessarily. It sounds like they have been all over but things like the engine design freezes they are talking about could have shut it down and required a redesign.

Additionally, being casual aka relaxed has been objectively proven to increase work output and quality.

See, this guy is a perfect example. Control.

Work being casual isn't a bad thing. Staff aren't being hired to be subject to control or signing up to be controlled. They are being hired because there is a task or set of tasks which needs to be performed in order to make a profit. End of story.