Radosław Szkodziński

Computer Programmer
Warsaw, Poland

About Radosław

Languages

English, German, Polish

Areas of Expertise

Computer Engineering/Science, Sound and Multimedia Technologies

Favorite talks

Comments & conversations

Noface
Radosław Szkodziński
Posted 3 months ago
Paul Tudor Jones II: Why we need to rethink capitalism
I'm talking about the reasonable possible results of implementing such a widespread, unqualified policy. These are forseen consequences - such debt systems are very similar to scholarships used today. Nothing comes free in a capitalist system - this increases pressure on achievement, and weaker people break under such pressure. What do you do about them then? How do you deal with wasted resources? And most importantly, who will cover the cost? What should instead be done is many various small pilot programs with various approaches instead, over more than one generation, to figure out the problems and unforseen consequences. We can already toss out the solutions which have already been tried and verified to be inefficient or bringing bad results.
Noface
Radosław Szkodziński
Posted 3 months ago
Nick Bostrom: What happens when our computers get smarter than we are?
High intelligence also recognises things it cannot or should not control. Remember that people relinquish control daily for sake of efficiency and quality. You might be confusing control with authority. Every person wants authority with regards to their self, but social contract reduces it. Therefore making the AI socially aware or a community should solve this issue.
Noface
Radosław Szkodziński
Posted 3 months ago
Nick Bostrom: What happens when our computers get smarter than we are?
An AI that doesn't have goals is useless. Heck, more useless than people without a goal. Even current supremely limited AIs are goal-seeking algorithms. There is no such thing as unlimited energy and raw materials - the AI will always be limited by the technologies it has - which it of course can attempt to improve if it's powerful enough. I agree that enforcing or encoding our values ("Laws of robotics") approach is doomed to fail; I bequeathe more of Asimov to the author of the talk. Albeit if an AI is smart enough and generalizing enough, it will manage to generalize survival towards all sentient life.
Noface
Radosław Szkodziński
Posted 3 months ago
Paul Tudor Jones II: Why we need to rethink capitalism
Sorry, but even in mathematical models any asymmetry of information breaks pure capitalism, creating accumulation of funds and therefore, power. On the other hand, current situation is meant to balance politics, economics and social power. The structure has lately balanced towards economic control way too much. Expanding the power of economically controlling entities (corporations) into social power will not solve the dilemma.
Noface
Radosław Szkodziński
Posted 3 months ago
Paul Tudor Jones II: Why we need to rethink capitalism
Such supposedly simple "solutions" often have unintentional results. What I predict would happen in this one is that any failure would be additionally punished by permanent debt, even more so than in current US education system - as an indirect result of inflation. Not to mention enormous economic pressure on graduates. It sounds like an attempt at cloning Japan's social pressures too. A system, where you must not fail is inhumane.
Noface
Radosław Szkodziński
Posted 6 months ago
Bjorn Lomborg: Global priorities bigger than climate change
Mass species extinction is happening all the time. Ocean acidification is another way of saying "mass species extinction". The extinction has a value and it is indeed high cost. The problem with this is extinction takes a long time and we have many *immediate* problems that can be fixed. If you have a solution that wouldn't cost everything on this planet, please share. This would cost everything we have and then some if put into necessary numbers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_removal Just reducing current emissions will only slow the process. So, instead, a relatively low cost approach would be to develop further, cost efficient technologies for CO2 removal while *slowly* improving existing infrastructure, at the same time *preventing* developing countries from using polluting energy sources and modes of transport. That can be done relatively cheaply. The problem is then building the required infrastructure later - when we will have more money. In the meantime, it's best to sponsor research (into biosequestration, ocean fertilization, chemical sequestration and so on) and not trying to solve this problem immediately. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_removal The cost is in trillions dollars... in facilities alone, not counting the resources required for the needed biofuels. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medea_hypothesis Are we now due to a repeat of permian-triassic mass extinction? Look how well we ended up afterwards...
Noface
Radosław Szkodziński
Posted 11 months ago
Martin Rees: Can we prevent the end of the world?
Correct, but the fight for said resources is not made for good causes or survival. It's made by the local rich few. They are fighting over power, sure, but not for the right reasons. We cannot limit population. Show me one way that is actually effective, other than murder via weapons of mass destruction. Even in China the population limits have not been successful. Africa could be relatively self sufficient, but they'd need lots of electricity to do that. There is enough capital for it - natural resources to trade for nuclear fuel, solar, battery technology, desalination equipment, means and workforce to build infrastructure - but not the will of the few who can afford and govern such a megaproject and not get corrupt like certain leaders in countries with rampant warfare nowadays. The issues mostly affect Central Africa to North Africa, as well as parts of Middle East...
Noface
Radosław Szkodziński
Posted 11 months ago
Martin Rees: Can we prevent the end of the world?
Are you really sure that this trend of increasing population will continue? Multiple projections say otherwise. It's already slowing down there, even after accounting for culling by AIDS and any efforts done to reduce population; those are relatively small blips. It's nearly exactly the same situation as in Europe during industrial revolution. Boom thanks to medicine and relative lack of famine, then bust and calm. Are those contraceptives actually effective at controlling population? Those wars are rarely over natural resources due to scarcity. They're not fighting for food and water, but for oil, diamonds, over religions, general control of the population, nationalism.