That would have been right around the time that airlines were transitioning to jet aircraft. Back before jet travel it could take a whole week to reach the far east.
We also spent a lot of money fixing non-critical systems that would have had next to zero impact if they’d failed. A middle manager not getting their sales report on time is not critical.
But at least with Y2K some effort was made in identifying actual problems. We didn’t just stop using computers because we were too scared of them. This latest round of AI panic is horribly vague and the problems are very poorly articulated.
There are many technologies that have killed and hurt a lot more people than nuclear weapons that are not monopolised by governments.
Cars and guns are two examples where ‘wanton usage’ can (and has) killed millions of people. Obviously they need regulation, but total control, even if it were possible doesn’t strike me as ideal.
If you go to England, you're better off going to the New Forest in Hampshire. Despite the name, it was established during the Norman period and at least feels like a substantial tract of older woodland. (Tiny by North American standards of course.)
I'm not sure if I'd agree with that, because that sounds like what normal humans do.
Systems and politics are not that. Not at all.
They're cold, calculating and fundamentally sociopathic.
A more fitting analogy I think would be "Yes we were bought by a bigger company, but trust us, there will be no changes".
Of course the buyout came with exact plans on who to lay off when, but panic would be bad for business.
reply