Like 5 or 10 years from now, scientists and researchers from across all universities will point out that “AI IS BAD!”.

  • m532@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    Western AI will collapse and then their “journalists” will scream “AI is bad because china” or “china is bad because AI”, depending on target audience.

  • Tracaine@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    12 days ago

    It already happened and I’m sure there’s plenty of studies, even though anecdotal evidence is more than enough. Covid proved humanity in general is exactly as horrible and stupid as I always suspected. They won’t help each other and many would rather die than give up their idiocy and superstitions.

    Remember how they fought to not have to wear simple masks to help each other? How they condemned the very medical professionals trying to save them?

  • Tanis Nikana@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    Trans people are who they say they are.

    We know this shit. I’m so tired of arguing against bad-faith motherfuckers for my existence.

  • ultranaut@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    12 days ago

    All that plastic inundating the environment and accumulating in our bodies is actually a serious problem.

  • scytale@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    I’m no food scientist or dietitian, but I won’t be surprised if Keto and Carnivore diets are confirmed to accelerate high blood pressure and heart disease.

  • venusaur@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    AI is not inherently bad. That’s like saying computers are bad. It’s the implementations of AI and the unethical training of AI that’s bad.

    • djsoren19@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 days ago

      You’ll never actually get studies “proving” this in a scientific sense, unfortunately, because there’s really no way to design an ethical experiment. You can’t force one group to take homeopathic treatments vs another group receiving medical care, just as you can’t force one group to take vaccines while another doesn’t.

      That being said, there are longitudinal studies demonstrating the rates of autism amongst vaccinated individuals and I wouldn’t be surprised if someone had done a similar study regarding medical outcomes for people who take homeopathic treatments. It’s just that scientists will never call that “proof” because the bar is very high, and media will always conflate that with “the jury is still out who knows what’s right” because they’re profit hungry bastards.

  • belluck@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    11 days ago

    Notice how almost every study in this thread has already been done numerous times.

    The Cons just say they’re wrong and the media claims that they have to represent ”both sides“ so the general public gets lead to believe the studies are also just opinions.

  • jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    I would love to see a well funded interventional study on institutionalized populations comparing a totally pbf diet vs totally abf diets and settle the debate once and for all.

  • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 days ago

    That going out and collecting random data is an inefficient and ineffective model of science. P hunting just makes worse scientists.