Zico Colter

in the face of overwhelming evidence, at least pointing to contrary outcomes.

Yeah, so I have a huge number of concerns here and sort of different tiers of concerns, I would say. Let's talk about misinformation, deep fakes, in general, kind of using these tools to proliferate different kinds of misinformation. This is a massive concern, of course, and I am deeply, deeply worried about this.

Yeah, so I have a huge number of concerns here and sort of different tiers of concerns, I would say. Let's talk about misinformation, deep fakes, in general, kind of using these tools to proliferate different kinds of misinformation. This is a massive concern, of course, and I am deeply, deeply worried about this.

Yeah, so I have a huge number of concerns here and sort of different tiers of concerns, I would say. Let's talk about misinformation, deep fakes, in general, kind of using these tools to proliferate different kinds of misinformation. This is a massive concern, of course, and I am deeply, deeply worried about this.

But the net result of this outcome is not going to be that people start to believe everything that they see in misinformation. The real negative outcome is that people are not going to believe anything that they see anymore, right? So

But the net result of this outcome is not going to be that people start to believe everything that they see in misinformation. The real negative outcome is that people are not going to believe anything that they see anymore, right? So

But the net result of this outcome is not going to be that people start to believe everything that they see in misinformation. The real negative outcome is that people are not going to believe anything that they see anymore, right? So

arguably, we are already well along this way, or well along this path already, where people basically don't believe anything that they read or that they see or anything else that doesn't already conform to their current beliefs. It didn't even need AI to get there. But AI is absolutely an accelerant for this process. What I will say, though, this is not a new phenomenon.

arguably, we are already well along this way, or well along this path already, where people basically don't believe anything that they read or that they see or anything else that doesn't already conform to their current beliefs. It didn't even need AI to get there. But AI is absolutely an accelerant for this process. What I will say, though, this is not a new phenomenon.

arguably, we are already well along this way, or well along this path already, where people basically don't believe anything that they read or that they see or anything else that doesn't already conform to their current beliefs. It didn't even need AI to get there. But AI is absolutely an accelerant for this process. What I will say, though, this is not a new phenomenon.

This is actually the human condition as we evolved. It is a relatively new phenomenon that we have a record of objective fact in the world. I mean, things like video didn't exist more than 100 years ago. Humans evolved at a time during an environment where all we could do was trust our close associates. That's how we believed things.

This is actually the human condition as we evolved. It is a relatively new phenomenon that we have a record of objective fact in the world. I mean, things like video didn't exist more than 100 years ago. Humans evolved at a time during an environment where all we could do was trust our close associates. That's how we believed things.

This is actually the human condition as we evolved. It is a relatively new phenomenon that we have a record of objective fact in the world. I mean, things like video didn't exist more than 100 years ago. Humans evolved at a time during an environment where all we could do was trust our close associates. That's how we believed things.

It's in some ways, we see it as tragic right now that we are maybe no longer in a world where we have a record of objective truth. But in another sense, maybe we're just getting back to kind of the world that we used to live in, where all we could do was trust our close associates about what we believe about the world.

It's in some ways, we see it as tragic right now that we are maybe no longer in a world where we have a record of objective truth. But in another sense, maybe we're just getting back to kind of the world that we used to live in, where all we could do was trust our close associates about what we believe about the world.

It's in some ways, we see it as tragic right now that we are maybe no longer in a world where we have a record of objective truth. But in another sense, maybe we're just getting back to kind of the world that we used to live in, where all we could do was trust our close associates about what we believe about the world.

Yeah. I mean, so obviously there are massive negative externalities, but we did evolve knowledge very well at a time before video, right? Before videos existed, we still made scientific progress. So there will be groups that decide that the certain bodies of scientific knowledge are valuable and they will advance them.

Yeah. I mean, so obviously there are massive negative externalities, but we did evolve knowledge very well at a time before video, right? Before videos existed, we still made scientific progress. So there will be groups that decide that the certain bodies of scientific knowledge are valuable and they will advance them.

Yeah. I mean, so obviously there are massive negative externalities, but we did evolve knowledge very well at a time before video, right? Before videos existed, we still made scientific progress. So there will be groups that decide that the certain bodies of scientific knowledge are valuable and they will advance them.

even in light of large other portions of the population, which have existed throughout all of history too, that don't value those scientific advances or think differently about the nature of scientific advances. We are already in this world, right? This is the world we already live in.