• 2 Posts
  • 40 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 5th, 2026

help-circle








  • If you want to convince someone of something, you’ve got to convince them it is beneficial for them to do or not do what you want. Otherwise, it comes off like you’re trying to selfishly impose your own will onto others.

    If someone says that AI speeds up their workflow (which they need to live and remain housed), and your response is “but it’s bad for moral reasons” you’re saying that your moral reasons matter more than the other person’s ability to earn money… A better idea would be to try to make them see that an ai subscription is a waste of money and doesn’t actually speed up their workflow.


  • why don’t you justify your want for destroying the planet and species.

    With respect, when people argue like this, my brain automatically interprets everything they stand for and believe in as wrong.

    Correct way to argue:

    “Here is a self-serving reason WHY IT BENEFITS !!YOU!! to do/not do the thing I am asking you to do or not do. It BENEFITS YOU to take my advice.”

    Incorrect way to argue:

    “I am literally Jesus Christ. I am the arbiter of all morality, and I am God in living flesh. If you do the bad thing, you’re going straight to Hell. You’re harming the environment and also killing babies by doing the bad thing.”

    Global warming has been around for a lot longer than AI. Now we’re having a conversation about Global Warming instead of AI. This can go on forever. A better argument is “AI makes YOU dumb over time, because YOU grow to rely on it,” or “AI is a liability FOR YOU because when you create something with it, you don’t know if the end product was made with stolen data.”

    I think it is more considerate to talk to people this way, because it shows that you care about the person you’re trying to convince, and you want what’s best for them.