> I just want to appreciate how well written and thought out this was
Cath church is well famous on writing good things and then failing at putting them in practice.
It took up to 1992 to see an official pardon to Galileo Galilei (1564 - 1642) we are still missing few words on people like Giordano Bruno, killed with fire because he dared to speculate of life outside of earth.
I personally find this piece of text over closer to a philosophic rant rather than an accurate analysis of the current situation.
> The commitment to ensuring that AI always supports and promotes the supreme value of the dignity of every human being and the fullness of the human vocation serves as a criterion of discernment for developers, owners, operators, and regulators of AI, as well as to its users. It remains valid for every application of the technology at every level of its use.
this is being said by the organisation who decided american natives were lacking souls and therefore could be killed, the very same organisation who helped promoting slavery across the world, in the 2nd world war worked together with nazis and it is well known it supported far right governments in south america in the 1970's .
the very same organisation against promoting condom use in Africa to prevent and contain AIDS .
> 54. Furthermore, there is the risk of AI being used to promote what Pope Francis has called the “technocratic paradigm,” which perceives all the world’s problems as solvable through technological means alone.[106] In this paradigm, human dignity and fraternity are often set aside in the name of efficiency, “as if reality, goodness, and truth automatically flow from technological and economic power as such.”[107] Yet, human dignity and the common good must never be violated for the sake of efficiency,[108] for “technological developments that do not lead to an improvement in the quality of life of all humanity, but on the contrary, aggravate inequalities and conflicts, can never count as true progress.”[109] Instead, AI should be put “at the service of another type of progress, one which is healthier, more human, more social, more integral.”[110]
TL;DR yes you can use AI but for few things, for other matters please refer to your local community priest
> Protesting without providing alternatives is futile and counter-productive.
Alternatives are suggested but they are largely ignored, postponed to the next legislation, criticized (with no scientific evidence) and finally hijacked by fake environmentalist who are just creating disinformation for their own interest/agenda
because my transaction is a legitimate one until proven otherwise (innocent until proven guilty principle), and i have the right to buy something without letting my bank know what or where i bough it.
I could or could not disclose that payment to my government depending on the laws and if there are fiscal benefits, it is my choice.
I should not be forced to use a middle man for those payments, even if this means i am open to be scammed or victim of fraud.
now, as other mentioned, what are some good reasons to FORCE ONLY electronic payments above 3000€ ?
while i agree that "taking away the all wealth of rich people and divide it among all people" is simply unrealistic, wrong and unpractical, i do believe we could ask the wealthier more "effort" than the actual one, without having to recreate a "ussr 2.0" or worst go again for that awful original "experience".
