If there’s one thing I learned is that things can always get worse. Especially when fascists are involved.

Edit: just make a new comment of you want to talk about something else. This just gives everyone a headache.

Anti-intellectualism never works because you are left with stupid people with persecution complexes running things. And they are going to do stupid stuff.

The trouble is that they can really wreck a society in the process.

Or what their definition of “defend” is, and how they plan to use that as support.

That’s not the end game. Conservatives will never be satisfied with progressives existing in their country, even if in a different state.

No, the goal secession. Or worse.

Did anyone say discovery?

This is more text, I’ll give you that, but it’s still not clear how it relates to professional ethics codes of journalists.

Surely you are not trying to say that professional ethics codes in and of themselves lead to wife beating, serial murder, prison abuse and genocide?

this assumes a moral authority, which can be dangerous

This barely even means anything. What do you really mean?

When I compare it to the shift to high level languages, I don’t mean it casually. I mean it as a direct analogy.

Business languages like COBOL were originally intended to be used directly by “non programmers”. We know how that turned out. Programmers did not go extinct. In fact, it led to a huge increase as more and more tasks were in economic scope for automation. The productivity increase of high level languages (which is huge!) is directly responsible for this.

I don’t think AI will make programmers disappear. But it will change the way the field is organized, the way the work is done, and the tasks that can be economically automated. And, here’s the thing, that goes for most knowledge economy jobs. Programming is just the most visible now.

I think you are vastly overestimating the uniqueness of most of what we do

I call it the “magical meat fallacy”.

We don’t disagree on much. It’s going to be a long and exciting road.

I would caution however about hanging your hat too much on all- or-nothing epistemology. It doesn’t really matter whether something or someone “knows” something if they can apply that information in a useful way. There are gradations of knowing (also for humans) and there are tasks that can be done productively at every step.

If you’ve ever had an intern or a really green junior you know what I mean ;)

There’s a responsibility to consider the impact of your reporting. See for example the SPJ code of ethics under “minimize harm”

https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

Journalism ethics is a very broad topic, but it’s more than just about reporting facts. It’s about serving your purpose as the fourth estate.

It’s a significant leap in abstraction. At least as big as the introduction of the first high level programming languages.

Journalism is inherently a public service.

That’s a overly reductive. News organizations have a public duty that goes beyond just throwing out facts and letting society sort through the mess.

Ibm just saw a way to make a quick buck

We just created a bunch of amoral, immortal billion dollar monstrosities and allowed them to amass unimaginable power. Who knew they would be used for evil?

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

Having to play this game where I need to repeat myself over and over until you actually read whats written is pretty old.

Sorry, what was that? Didn’t quite catch it.

That’s the point innit?

That’s why the OPs comment was racist as shit.

I’m glad you’re starting to catch on.

Answer my question then.