TED Community » Truong Thanh Chung

Comments

• TEDCred score: +78.30 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.

• A reply on Talk: Daniel Suarez: The kill decision shouldn't belong to a robot

  1 day ago: Thanks Reza. I hope Holywood will take your idea and make a new shooting movie. Crazy people with personal killer robot is a great recipe for supper violence scenes. Can't wait!!
• +1

  A comment on Talk: Daniel Suarez: The kill decision shouldn't belong to a robot

  1 day ago: I totally support Daniel's position for the need of a treaty to ban the development and use of killer robots. Yet, some of his arguments are shabby.
  
  First, he argues that the political power of feudal society needs to rely on people due to the growth of army size; and since the robotic tools need very few people to control, there's no longer that need, which will undermine the democracy. It's a bad argument. A state needs its people more on providing finance though tax collection. And since the lethal autonomy system is not cheap, the need is still there.
  
  Second, I felt that he tried to avoid the morality of the using killer robots, where in my opinion, must be in the very central of the argument.
  
  Third, his argument on the using of data for eliminating the high value target that will corrupt the cohesion of society. Even though this is a valid argument, I think it seems more in a science fiction novel, which may damage the main idea against killer robot as something that very real and need immediate action.
• +1

  A comment on Talk: Daniel Suarez: The kill decision shouldn't belong to a robot

  2 days ago: For those who argue that wars are inhumane and therefore nothing we can do to make it less bloody. Yes, we can. We already have international treaties on nuclear and biological weapons, and others more common like Convention on Cluster Munitions. And, while imperfect, these have largely worked.
  
  With the very same argument, we should and we can agree on a global ban of the development and deployment of killer robots. How about if Taliban won't care the treaty? No, they won't. We still need the laws regardless of criminals who won't stop breaking them.
  
  By the way, the Convention on Cluster Munitions is still opposed by a number of countries that produce or stockpile significant quantities of cluster munitions, including China, Russia, the United States, India, Israel, Pakistan and Brazil. So there's still lots of works to do.

• A comment on Talk: Daniel Suarez: The kill decision shouldn't belong to a robot

  2 days ago: I'm surprised to see so many cynical comments here against such an absolute true argument: the kill decision shouldn't belong to a robot. My guess is the most cynical people also have the loudest voice. I rarely comment on a talk that I totally support the speaker, this time I will say: thanks Daniel, I absolutely agree with you.

• A reply on Talk: George Papandreou: Imagine a European democracy without borders

  2 days ago: Marx is being blamed for many things he never said. Now is the time better than ever to erase the irrational fear of what so call Marxism. I'm sure there are many things proved wrong in his legacy, yet many things we can still learn from him, who arguably the greatest philosopher of all time.

• A reply on Talk: Andrew McAfee: What will future jobs look like?

  6 days ago: You can watch the talk on Youtube.

• A reply on Talk: Andrew McAfee: What will future jobs look like?

  Jun 11 2013: @Nick: It's possible that the unemployment will increase in this generation due to the growth of automation, but it's not necessary the issue of the next generation. They will not work as truck drivers like we are no longer have the job as elevator operators. What will they do then? Something else besides. No one knows the existence of the job so called computer programmer 100 years ago. My point is: there's always innovations in that regard along the way of development, and the fear of race against machine in the long run is baseless with so much evidence as we learn in the past.
• +1

  A reply on Talk: Andrew McAfee: What will future jobs look like?

  Jun 11 2013: In the worse case, I will buy a house, grow food and exchange for other things with my robot neighbors. My point is: we worry too much. Even if one completely unable to think, he's still able to survive well in an abundant society.

• A reply on Talk: Andrew McAfee: What will future jobs look like?

  Jun 11 2013: No one is saying Ted is better than Bill. Problem is in reality the machines are replacing Bill in jobs he's doing. The question is what to do.

• A reply on Talk: Andrew McAfee: What will future jobs look like?

  Jun 11 2013: Who will buy the cars? Not by the people on the government welfare program. This shows again not the solution in that regard, at least not the fundamental solution we need.
  
  Changes in occupations happen throughout history. In the future we might need ferwer truck drivers with the very same reason as right now we need fewer horse riders than in the past: technological development driven to a more effective transportation method. This is not the first time we see the fear of the age where human is replaced by machine. And even with new skills that machines acquired, I still see it's far far away from what a human brain able to do. That gives me hope that a educated man can beat the machine in the world that need more and more creativity.