The “ I’ve got something to say, but it doesn’t warrant its own thread “ thread.

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Izzy said:

I'm not so sure that's true. 

 

I think most kids these days spend so much time sat on their arses looking at devices and eating shite rather than being active - it's no wonder they're always tired.

 

We never had the temptation of watching TickTok until the early hours on our phones, and playing football after school knackered us out naturally so we slept properly.

 

Just my opinion of course...

I'm not sure about the bolded part given that nutrition levels would in all likelihood correspond with increase in life expectancy and decrease in child mortality (good nutrition makes you less susceptible to disease, after all) and so right now I don't think there's a issue with what kids are eating, but the culture of instant gratification brought thought Internet access is something to talk about.

 

But there's not really much putting the genie back in that particular bottle, so we're going to have to roll with it.

[Izzy]

5 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I'm not sure about the bolded part given that nutrition levels would in all likelihood correspond with increase in life expectancy and decrease in child mortality (good nutrition makes you less susceptible to disease, after all) and so right now I don't think there's a issue with what kids are eating, but the culture of instant gratification brought thought Internet access is something to talk about.

 

But there's not really much putting the genie back in that particular bottle, so we're going to have to roll with it.

When I was a schoolkid in the late 70's/early 80's most Mums were housewives. They'd cook the kids a proper meal for when they got back from school, and sent them off to school with a good breakfast in them and a decent packed lunch.

 

Is this still the case today? Or are both parents so busy working that the kids leave for school with a chocolate bar for breakfast, some soggy school chips for lunch, and then have to make themselves a microwave dinner when they get home?

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Izzy said:

When I was a schoolkid in the late 70's/early 80's most Mums were housewives. They'd cook the kids a proper meal for when they got back from school, and sent them off to school with a good breakfast in them and a decent packed lunch.

 

Is this still the case today? Or are both parents so busy working that the kids leave for school with a chocolate bar for breakfast, some soggy school chips for lunch, and then have to make themselves a microwave dinner when they get home?

And yet kids are both dying and having incidences of serious illness less than ever before, by proportion. Perhaps that's all to do with advances in sanitation and medicine and nothing whatsoever to do with nutrition, though.

 

I'm not entirely sold on the idea of the "all natural proper meal" having inherently more nutritional value than what kids get today, or even that most kids in the late 70's early 80's really got that, in any case - seems like just an Appeal to Nature fallacy to me. I'd be happy to be proven wrong, however.

[Izzy]

6 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

And yet kids are both dying and having incidences of serious illness less than ever before, by proportion. Perhaps that's all to do with advances in sanitation and medicine and nothing whatsoever to do with nutrition, though.

 

I'm not entirely sold on the idea of the "all natural proper meal" having inherently more nutritional value than what kids get today, or even that most kids in the late 70's early 80's really got that, in any case - seems like just an Appeal to Nature fallacy to me. I'd be happy to be proven wrong, however.

I can only go by what I see (although doesn't the data suggest kids are more obese now compared to 30/40 years ago?)

 

When I was at school there was probably one 'Roland from Grange Hill' kid in each class, but half the kids these days look like fat knackers.

 

And we wonder why they're all tired and lethargic?

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, Izzy said:

I can only go by what I see (although doesn't the data suggest kids are more obese now compared to 30/40 years ago?)

 

When I was at school there was probably one 'Roland from Grange Hill' kid in each class, but half the kids these days look like fat knackers.

 

And we wonder why they're all tired and lethargic?

I reckon that's more to do with amounts of food available rather than quality of it, but again, my guess is as speculative as anyone's there.

 

I do however think that students do have to grasp rather more knowledge in terms of education (at least in some ways) than they did in previous times. At least a broader base of knowledge, anyhow.

[Free Falling Foxes]

57 minutes ago, Izzy said:

I'm not so sure that's true. 

 

I think most kids these days spend so much time sat on their arses looking at devices and eating shite rather than being active - it's no wonder they're always tired.

 

We never had the temptation of watching TickTok until the early hours on our phones, and playing football after school knackered us out naturally so we slept properly.

 

Just my opinion of course...

I must say, it is posssible that late nights on devices may well play a part too.

[Izzy]

Just now, Free Falling Foxes said:

I must say, it is posssible that late nights on devices may well play a part too.

I know it does for my two teenagers 

[Free Falling Foxes]

Just now, Izzy said:

I know it does for my two teenagers 

I think they are encouraged to study harder however. The homework they get now, far outstrips what you received in my school days

[LiberalFox]

I used to get tired out after school which was probably partly down to me having (undiagnosed at the time) ADHD. I don't know how it is for today's kids but can't help but feel it would be even more difficult today. People said exactly the same things back then that they do today. Blamed it on poor diet. Blamed it on not enough physical activity. Blamed it on parents letting their kids stay up too late and watch TV all day. 

 

I'm not saying kids have all got ADHD though, but they may be exposed to ever increasing levels of stress which will cause that tiredness and lethargy. 

[Sampson]

Just got myself down a ChatGPT rabbit hole for almost an hour before I realised what I was doing. Then I was reminded of that old Deus Ex scene of AI originally being development as a gimmick to an amuse visitors with information about themselves, because humans need to feel important and judged (hence why religion and fame were so idolised in the past) and society depends on that. Fecking hell, it's depressing how easily were sucked in by technology.

 

 

Edited 25 May 2023 by Sampson

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Just got myself down a ChatGPT rabbit hole for almost an hour before I realised what I was doing. Then I was reminded of that old Deus Ex scene of AI originally being development as a gimmick to an amuse visitors with information about themselves, because humans need to feel important and judged (hence why religion and fame were so idolised in the past) and society depends on that. Fecking hell, it's depressing how easily were sucked in by technology.

 

 

We need to be damn careful around this, just the same as we need to be careful around any other new tech that's revolutionary (and this one really has potential there).

 

Thing is though, like other examples of advanced tech, we could do with keeping it around and making sure we can utilise it where needed, because one day it may be necessary when it comes to solving a "natural" problem that we couldn't without it. And that may make a critical difference.

[Sampson]

8 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

We need to be damn careful around this, just the same as we need to be careful around any other new tech that's revolutionary (and this one really has potential there).

 

Thing is though, like other examples of advanced tech, we could do with keeping it around and making sure we can utilise it where needed, because one day it may be necessary when it comes to solving a "natural" problem that we couldn't without it. And that may make a critical difference.

Well sure that was in the game too. At one point AI is used to govern the governments and economies of the entire world because it was believed it would be fairer, more impartial and less corrupt than humans. You have to decide at the end of the game whether you want to go forward with a one-world AI government or go back to the failing late 20th century, liberal, capitalist nation states model. Was such a great game from 2000, so far ahead of its time 

Edited 25 May 2023 by Sampson

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Sampson said:

Well sure that was in the game too. At one point AI is used to govern the governments and economies world because it was believed it would be fairer, more impartial and less corrupt than humans. You have to decide at the end of the game whether you want to go forward with AI government or the failing late 20th century, liberal, capitalist nation states model. Was such a great game from 2000, so far ahead of its time 

I mean, I think that shit would be much more likely to be Metal Gear Solid "Patriots" than really benevolent, but then I'm not big on inhibiting development either because nature has shown that it can and happily will throw the kind of issues at us that we either turn to such tech to help solve or face untold pain and misery on a regular basis. And so far most of those problems have been relatively tame.

 

So it's a proper difficult tightrope for humanity to walk, but we have to walk it and hope like hell our balance is good.

[RobHawk]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

I mean, I think that shit would be much more likely to be Metal Gear Solid "Patriots" than really benevolent, but then I'm not big on inhibiting development either because nature has shown that it can and happily will throw the kind of issues at us that we either turn to such tech to help solve or face untold pain and misery on a regular basis. And so far most of those problems have been relatively tame.

 

So it's a proper difficult tightrope for humanity to walk, but we have to walk it and hope like hell our balance is good.

I would say **** it, as humans we had our chance and we continued to completely **** it up and are now taking the planet with us. Give the bots a chance

[Captain...]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65709834

 

On the flip side of the AI debate.

[marbles]

8 minutes ago, RobHawk said:

I would say **** it, as humans we had our chance and we continued to completely **** it up and are now taking the planet with us. Give the bots a chance

Yes!  Give us a chance!

 

[Sampson]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

I mean, I think that shit would be much more likely to be Metal Gear Solid "Patriots" than really benevolent, but then I'm not big on inhibiting development either because nature has shown that it can and happily will throw the kind of issues at us that we either turn to such tech to help solve or face untold pain and misery on a regular basis. And so far most of those problems have been relatively tame.

 

So it's a proper difficult tightrope for humanity to walk, but we have to walk it and hope like hell our balance is good.

It’s an interesting debate. I’ve said before on here that I think the nation state is probably on the way out long-term. It was useful in the post-empire period since WW2, but the world is too globalised now and people move around too much as resources are divided for it to last forever. I’m not sure how you really govern it though - whether you give the UN more powers as a federation so we essentially have a worldwide version of the EU or what?

 

I doubt it will be static over time either. Government styles go in and out of fashion over the centuries. I imagine AI will have a larger and smaller role in governance as time goes by and its popularity in governance will wain and wax throughout the decades and centuries.
 

Be interesting to know how long until the first state openly admits to using AI in its judgement making in law creation though 

[leicsmac]

7 hours ago, RobHawk said:

I would say **** it, as humans we had our chance and we continued to completely **** it up and are now taking the planet with us. Give the bots a chance

There may come a point where it may simply be that a bot cannot do any worse than humanity, yeah. Hopefully not and we can use AI as an adjutant and not have it run the show, though.

 

 

7 hours ago, Captain... said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-65709834

 

On the flip side of the AI debate.

This is exactly the kind of stuff I'm talking about. Who knows what problems we might have going forward that the advantages of an AI might be able to solve where human effort could not? As per above, the difference one day might end up being critical. So...while we need to be careful, we need to keep on with the development.

 

7 hours ago, marbles said:

Yes!  Give us a chance!

 

 

 

6 hours ago, Sampson said:

It’s an interesting debate. I’ve said before on here that I think the nation state is probably on the way out long-term. It was useful in the post-empire period since WW2, but the world is too globalised now and people move around too much as resources are divided for it to last forever. I’m not sure how you really govern it though - whether you give the UN more powers as a federation so we essentially have a worldwide version of the EU or what?

 

I doubt it will be static over time either. Government styles go in and out of fashion over the centuries. I imagine AI will have a larger and smaller role in governance as time goes by and its popularity in governance will wain and wax throughout the decades and centuries.
 

Be interesting to know how long until the first state openly admits to using AI in its judgement making in law creation though 

I've said it for the longest time, too. There are some problems that are simply too big for individual nation-states to solve and there needs to be an authority bigger than they. I know a lot of individualist and nationalist types will cry out about "One World Order" and all that, and of course there needs to be a careful balance of power depending on issue between local areas and at the global level, but it's a simple matter of fact that global collaboration is what is needed to keep civilisation going on some matters, and that collaboration requires authority. One world or no world.

 

I also think that you're right that so long as we use AI as an adjutant for governance, it's role can be bigger or smaller and tailored to the needs at the time.

[CosbehFox]

The amountt of comments I've seen from Leicester fans on social media 'Premier League are this, Man City are this, Sky are this. Football was better before. A real game'. 

 

We've all given into that process over the last 20 years, bringing it up now because we lost a few games don't half get on my wick. 

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, CosbehFox said:

The amountt of comments I've seen from Leicester fans on social media 'Premier League are this, Man City are this, Sky are this. Football was better before. A real game'. 

 

We've all given into that process over the last 20 years, bringing it up now because we lost a few games don't half get on my wick. 

Hypocrisy is part of the tribal nature of the game, more's the pity.

[kingkisnorbo]

The amount of new threads last night to discuss effectively the same topic is nauseating. Don’t know where to look. 

[leicsmac]

36 minutes ago, kingkisnorbo said:

The amount of new threads last night to discuss effectively the same topic is nauseating. Don’t know where to look. 

Expected, sadly.

 

Passion and reactionary behaviour, as opposed to reason. is going to rule the roost for a while, I should think.

[Phil Bowman]

40 minutes ago, kingkisnorbo said:

The amount of new threads last night to discuss effectively the same topic is nauseating. Don’t know where to look. 

I would suggest not looking on the main forum, for a day or two at least.

[HighPeakFox]

5 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Expected, sadly.

 

Passion and reactionary behaviour, as opposed to reason. is going to rule the roost for a while, I should think.

Passion? Give me a break. 

 

(I imagine you used the word with inverted commas) 

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

Passion? Give me a break. 

 

(I imagine you used the word with inverted commas) 

Well, passion is "strong and barely controllable emotion"; no one said it had to be good emotion.

 

So yes, I'm definitely applying it in a negative context here.