that sounds like an ai response.  my actual whole point is a couple things. 1. the human brain is limited in its ability to manage conceptual arrays. the thinking time increases exponentially and autistic programmers think that they can use a computer to crunch the observation part of an engineering process. 2. rich people are inherently flawed in their ability to make moral decisions before instant gratification decisions.  3. the moral obligation in question when using ai tech is about the path to accountability when things go wrong. indian programmers are good at solving the problem of identifying the fault, but they fall shorter than most when it comes down to finding a new solution. 4. a generation is passing where we no longer have trained people with the experience required to let those programmers come up with solutions other than by trial and error. 5. while trial and error seems to work with elon's exploding rockets, when real people are killed, the errors create an accumulating toxicity on the population. the rich are trying to solve the problem with quantum computing which only allows them to trial and error faster. 6. the toxicity of experimenting with a live public is to create a sickness in the aristocratic rich who stop trying to solve the original engineering problems and only work to shut up the public anger. 7. the real solution is to use ai properly. what it's good for is processing large amounts of data to create formulas that traditional computers can process. the real world example is elon's rockets that land on a pad. while learning the decision making process, ai helps. after a plateau level is reached, you need to stop trying to balance a wet noodle on it's tip and simply create more responsive machines. programmers have to accept that what they do is program ai. engineers need to understand the physics and physicists need to define the physics.  it's a loop that doesn't require rich assholes.
United States