@MarcLA28@mattyglesias ah yes, the only Republican to ever run in a blue state under unified Republican control. This must be the recipe to her unique success.
@mainepilled@bdquinn Biden already got ~36% of non-college whites in 2020 nationally. Main is a very blue state, so you'd expect him to do a bit better?
@newliberals@mattyglesias "the base was demoralized" explains the outcome of exactly 0 elections in modern US history. Partisans ultimately vote, because they're partisans. Most of the variance is persuasion.
@CoreyLeander@arpitrage I mean, 10 years ago if you had told me AI would solve a problem worth an Annals paper in 2026, I would've guessed major white collar job displacement had already happened several years before! These things are hard to predict.
@CoreyLeander@arpitrage it's a very different argument! The case for preventing AI from curing cancer to preserve human meaning is extremely weak, because people can simply point out the fact that there is plenty of human meaning to be found outside of curing cancer.
@CoreyLeander@arpitrage I personally don't equate AI cancer research with complete human meaning destruction. But if your point is that we can't pick and choose, and AI will just swallow every other source of human meaning along with cancer research, then maybe that's the right argument to lead with?
@CoreyLeander@arpitrage Your comments show up in every thread on this topic, and I think your underlying point has value. But yeah, if you think the only mathematicians "worth saving" are those who prefer their loved ones dying of cancer to an AI-discovered cure, then you're trying to save the empty set
@CoreyLeander@arpitrage what reaction are you trying to get? Isn't your goal to persuade people of the risks of human disempowerment and loss of meaning from AI? This argument does exactly the opposite of that. It's not even persuasive to most *mathematicians*, let alone society at large.
@CoreyLeander there is a good argument hidden here about the pace of AI broadly outpacing society's ability to adapt and upending people's livelihoods. But "curing cancer" is close to the worst possible example to make that case, just stop.
@CoreyLeander we don't do it because banning travel would trade a smaller harm (car deaths) for a MUCH larger one (destroying the economy, access to everything)? Cancer has literally no upside. Is your goal to make people hate scientists? Just please stop making this argument.
@littmath@tonylfeng if this is what's going to happen, it seems extremely urgent for senior mathematicians to figure out an answer to the question: "how do you build a career in mathematics?" For young people the uncertainty of the current situation is genuinely despairing.
@thinkiamsad@ValValkyri@sambbury None of those words cuts as deep (if at all). And I don't think you're "giving up the trust of disabled people" at all. All it does is bother a small number of (not disabled) people on the left who are on the squishier side, and that's no big deal.