I’m not sure if I just thought this up sitting on the tiles in my shower room or if I dreamt it, but still.
Edit: I’m being cynical and I hate our blind faith in and reliance on LLMs.
TBH, I’d be surprised if it isn’t happening somewhere already.
It is the perfect tool for the rich, they can influence it, you can’t see how it makes its decisions, and it can’t be held liable.
Why not? Apparently, it’s acceptable to use AI to decide bombing targets.
Who the fuck is us? Certainly not me.
No idea. But probably the same people that take AI summaries at face values, without vetting the sources. Who knows.
us ~> US
Have you ever seen this episode of Star Trek voyager?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_Care_(Star_Trek%3A_Voyager)
The algorithm will be altered to say poor people don’t deserve healthcare because they are more replaceable and their life has less value to the shareholders and billionaires. They will be denied medical treatment which will cause early death.
That was an excellent episode of Voyager.
just like real life now
So the same, just automated. If you believe capitalism cares about or values poor people right now well I’ve got bad news for you 😂
Even at 10 years old i couldnt believe they allowed that to come out
Why not? It makes some people nod “finally that’s on screen”, feeling a little not of relief, and then nothing changes.
So let me tell you about insurance review panels
My favourite dystopian theories are always the ones it turns out america has already been doing for 150 years.
Like the torment nexus ain’t just inspirational, its systemically foundational.
not if will smith has anythihg to say about it.
FINALLY
it’ll become acceptable to us
Speak for yourself. This is fully unacceptable.
More like calculated the cost to the insurance company.
Estimated Time to Death (ETD) feels like a near future stat used to justify killing terminal patients.
And in a few decades we can start using Estimated Societal Contributions to determine how much a person’s entire life might be worth and at what point it becomes financially irresponsible to continue providing any sort of support.
I think we started that a few decades ago with credit score?
Like we don’t directly kill anyone I suppose, but definitely indirectly increase the odds when they are less helpful monetarily.
Just for example with the gen Z suicide epidemic, by definition people are killing themselves not being killed. But to a company this is financially beneficial, cause a left-wing bias has on average resulted in more restrictive laws and a lower profit margin. It becomes an important business strategy to ensure they remain poor and anxious (and of course this causes some to be suicidal). Vice versa for boomers of course, elder care has never been better funded across human history.
Or another example, credit score companies would be “throwing money away” if they weren’t also doing this for like union-oriented families, ie ensuring those who have statistically unionised (or follow any trends that might be too union-y), they’re marked less valuable.
So they can kill people by letting them starve/OD/get in a car accident, or just shorten their lifespan with cheap housing, all without ever having to see a poor person.
Hadn’t thought of it that way, and you’re absolutely correct. So many things require a good credit score.
So all ded at 65 then.
Yep. I’m so glad I won’t be around for that.
It won’t calculate the odds of survival. It’ll calculate the revenue that can be extracted from you.
Yes, because human doctors make a lot of mistakes.
It’ll never be acceptable, but they’re going to shove it down our throats anyway
