I prefer the profit motive over the authoritarian "altruist" motive.
Pessimists before ads: OpenAI is a bubble fueled by dumb money waiting to pop, they'll never be profitable!
Pessimists after ads: Ok it's not a bubble but advertising is evil!
Pessimists after hearing paid subscribers won't get ads: Pffftttt $20 per month??? Profit is evil!! I can spin up a local LLM on my Linux machine for free!
Pessimists after admitting you can just choose not to use ChatGPT, a result of the free market: But I don't like that OTHER people are using ChatGPT because they're obviously dumb if they don't agree with me!
I went with Pop Os, had a little stability and audio issues, and went with Arch. Everything works really well now. YMMV. I took the opposite extreme; the only things running are the things that I enabled. It took a little more work, and it was worth the afternoon it took.
Governments are formed by single cultures with a shared value set, and a set of ethics that they believe in. Your statement that laws aren't needed until they are is accurate.
As those shared values are lost, the ethics built upon them erode, more laws are constructed. However, there comes a point where this system of check and balance can no longer function properly, and eventually, the system either becomes too unwieldy to function, or else the system is destroyed due to rebellion or anarchy.
Why? Because law is an attempt to encode ethics based on shared values. No culture which does not share values can long endure when attempting to solve the problem through increasingly complex rules with no underlying theme.
We do teach people parenting. The action is called parenting.
I teach my kids how to parent by practicing it. I learned how to parent my children by observing my boomer parents, and doing the opposite in nearly every circumstance.
My parents did a fantastic job of raising me. However, at the time that I was a child being raised, I didn't take notes about the things they were doing that worked so well. I was just a kid, and had only the vaguest notion at the time that I might someday be a parent myself. I had no mind about me to study how I was being parented.
Now I wish I had a more detailed memory. I have many memories of my childhood of course, but I don't remember the little things that my parents were doing "behind the scenes" to make it all work.
> We do teach people parenting. The action is called parenting.
Even the unpaywalled part of the article mentions that experience is too narrow and obviously inadequate. For instance: being parented is quite different from parenting; there's a long important period where the child will have no memory (or only vague disconnected memory) of being parented; and the experience of being parented gives insight into other parenting styles.
> I teach my kids how to parent by practicing it. I learned how to parent my children by observing my boomer parents, and doing the opposite in nearly every circumstance.
The opposite of one mistake isn't the correct action, it's usually a different mistake. Even though you gave zero details, I suspect "doing the opposite" will just set your kids up to repeat your parents' mistakes.
