It's not like there was no garbage output before, but it's the scale at which it can be done nowadays that is the key, I think.
Today's social media environment means there's no need to consider that at all. Just say stuff. The more attention-grabbing it is, the more likely it will be amplified - and if it gets buzz online the media will cover it too.
> Why Is This CEO Bragging About Replacing Humans with A.I.?
Because they want to get attention, ideally that leads to coverage in publications like the NY Times.
... and they have an IPO coming up, so getting the markets excited about betting on an "AI-first" company is a smart strategy. Lots of money out there looking to get in on the current bubble.
Update: yeah, from later in that story:
> A former Klarna manager, who left in 2022, said the rhetorical emphasis on A.I. was no accident. According to the manager, there was a sense within the company that Klarna had lost its sheen in the media and among investors, and that Mr. Siemiatkowski was desperate to get it back.
> The former manager said the A.I. story provided a lifeline at a time when Klarna was hoping to offer shares on the public markets. It demonstrated that the company was still on the cutting edge, and that it was shrinking not because it had faltered but because it had figured out how to replace humans with machines.
I'm sure the following people would totally agree here with what you said... /s, no not really.
https://apnews.com/article/fox-news-dominion-lawsuit-trial-t...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depp_v._Heard
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/31/us/politics/defamation-la...
This is certainly untrue, and the belief/sentiment this engenders is highly problematic philosophy that is a spiritual disease that rots those from within.
It is based in nihilism, which is a modern spinoff of ancient gnosticism.
The whole idea that everything is fake and meaningless, and you are free to do any evil thing you want at the expense of others, since everything is relative, naturally emerges from the views in this subject matter, which have been shown to be both destructive, and morally wrong.
Reason and logic do exist, and are crucial tools to discern truth from falsehood, and those with these abilities will have greater odds of surviving the disadvantaged environment we find ourselves progressing to.
When society fails, those who are delusional, or insane often don't survive that long. They are dead weight, and people go out of their ways in such unforgiving environments to test people in terms of Darwin's fitness.
In olden times the insane were often put to death because there was no cure and resources were scarce. You can get you killed in non-permissive unforgiving environments exhibiting such behaviors.
When society fails, and its progressing towards that, violence will be everywhere. Do you think those that have honed their minds and bodies as weapons, will survive more often than others who have neglected this?
The main point of many hundreds of years of classical literature is to instill the facts that the world is cruel, and people are cruel, and the most intelligent of people, the gods are cruel, and they will tempt and test the mortals, and the only thing that gets those who are tested through to survive in the end, during such an Odyssey, is to always be refining your rational thinking and observing reality and taking appropriate action based in reality.
You really shouldn't support destructive ideology that lacks any moral basis, or induce others to think the same.