this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2025
487 points (90.9% liked)

Technology

74153 readers
3469 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 34 points 1 day ago (20 children)

The first country to adopt LLMs for everything is the one that will collapse first. This is a race where the winners never start and at best stop before they reach the end.

[–] Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world 13 points 22 hours ago (19 children)
[–] Saledovil@sh.itjust.works 7 points 21 hours ago (17 children)

Maybe. Could also be that humans never invent anything that comes close to a biological brain. Either because we simply aren't smart enough, or because civilization regresses before we get there. And there's several trends going on currently which could cause civilization to regress. For example, climate change and declining birth rates (While we could set up an economic system that can deal with a shrinking and aging population, our current one cannot).

[–] khaleer@sopuli.xyz 3 points 16 hours ago (3 children)

Wait, since when population is shrinking? And since when it's a bad thing too?

[–] Saledovil@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 hours ago

It's not shrinking yet, the birth rate is declining, and the world population is projected to start declining 2050.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago

Technically there should be a ratio of young to old to take care of all of the elderly, but IMO fuck'em it wasn't the young's choice to be born and suffer for the sake of the old.

Lower population will make resource allocation easier and improve quality of life, and obviously is necessary to prevent further environmental damage. There will be momentary suffering for a brighter future.

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 3 points 15 hours ago (2 children)

I don't think it is shrinking globally, yet. But, some countries (e.g. South Korea) are in dire situations due to shrinking and aging population already.

[–] khaleer@sopuli.xyz 3 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

But it's mostly caused by social issues, imo it is nowhere near being a real problem

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 3 points 15 hours ago

I agree with your premise, but I don't think it implies your conclusion, which I disagree with.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 0 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Might be bad now but it leads to a better future. Infinite growth was always impossible, this is just the result of decades of mismanagement.

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

The future for S. Korea looks bleak, not better.

I agree that infinite growth was always impossible, but in some countries birth rate is well below replacement rate (if they matched, population would be stable, not growing), and in many birth rate + immigration rate is also below replacement rate -- we are failing not at growth, but "mere" stability.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world -1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Idgaf about replacement rate. I don't want the old to be replaced. I want the economy to get smaller and for the wealth to be better distributed.

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Smaller economy is fine, I guess -- tho deflation has certainly caused problems in the past. Better distributed wealth is a shared goal. Depopulation, and other forms of Degrowth, are largely driven by eugenicist ideas and are neither necessary nor desirable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OW8vkUY93i8

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

You might notice I never once promoted any such depopulation ideas, simply that the natural negative growth trend as a result of highly educated populations is a good thing that we should not take any action against.

We need less people, we don't need to make the number of people less: it happens on its own.

If it were possible to make a nondiscrimatory policy against growth then that would be great, but we already saw attempts fail in places like China which resulted in skewed demographics. In 1994 in Cairo the UN met and decided the best answer was simply: Educate Women.

[–] bss03@infosec.pub 0 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

We need less people

No we don't. And, S. Korea in particular will need more people than they have available, soon.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 1 points 16 minutes ago* (last edited 15 minutes ago)

They don't NEED more people, nowhere on earth NEEDS more people, as long as you have as few as 12 genetically distinct individuals then life will continue, and even if they did NEED people then theres lots of people all over the world who would love to migrate to SK.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)