>I suppose you can summarize their positions as the right is in favor of self-determination, whereas the left appears to prefer to let others determine their fate.
I mean, no I really don't summarize it that way at all.
>Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect
Is a better, but much more politically charged saying.
Moreso, self determination is more of a libertarian thing rather than right directly.
Figuring out the proper abstractions is much, much harder than writing the software itself. Software changes requirements... When you do something new and useful for a customer, they will extend use of the software till it breaks again. You will always run into a new bottleneck.
The proper abstraction is that which can easily be thrown away. I've not found that to be too difficult to figure out. Maybe when I was new to development – that was too long ago to remember – but once you have experience, at least.
It can become extremely difficult to figure out if you mar yourself with someone else's framework. That is quite true. But is also what the parent said.
It's hard to generalize as domains vary greatly, but in general abstractions can account for more than enough extensibility unless the requirements are extremely vague and not well defined. This tends to be the case of why so many changes are constantly needed, because usually Product and Design are not defining requirements with abstractions in mind.
Domain Driven Design basically aimed at tackling this issue, by trying to synchronize abstractions across departments, so I get that there are no easy solutions, especially in large orgs.
Honesty the biggest what could go wrong is things like vegetables will stop producing the useful large fruits we eat if we're trying to grow things for food.
Anarchist: "If everyone would just stop forming governments"
>but if literally no one voted the government wouldn’t maintain legitimacy
This is why no one takes anarchists seriously.
Now, the problem is not voting for first parties. It's lack of mandatory voting, and FPTP voting. Change it to ranked choice and suddenly third party votes wouldn't be wasted votes.
So the question is, if you have AGI/ASI how much productive work could you get done with it?
When looking at things like mechanization and the productivity increases from around 1880 to now, you took an economy from around 10 billion a year to 14 trillion. This involved mechanization and digitization. We live in a world that someone from 1880 really couldn't imagine.
What I don't know how to answer (or at least search properly) is how much investment this took over that 150 year period. I'm going to assume it's vastly more than $7 trillion. If $7 trillion in investment and manufacturing allowed us to produce human level+ AI then the economic benefits of this would be in the tend to hundreds of trillions.
Now, this isn't saying it would be good for me and you personally, but the capability to apply intelligence to problems and provide solutions would grow very rapidly and dramatically change the world we live in now.
> If $7 trillion in investment and manufacturing allowed us to produce human level+ AI then the economic benefits of this would be in the tend to hundreds of trillions.
Sure, but right now that "if" is trying to do 7 trillion dollars of unsubstantiated heavy lifting. I might be able to start creating Iron Man-style arc reactors in a cave with a box of scraps and all I ask is 1 trillion, so you all should invest given how much money unlimited free energy is worth.
