Comments for entry "Digital Hats" at Dilbert.com Blog

Comment from weaponizedMILK

TueAMCSTE_Rthth

Replying to Phantom II first I dont think you really understand how Scott mocks the idea of free will. Correct me if Im wrong, Scott, but the best way to look at it, ESPECIALLY in the idea of religion, is that we pretend we are somehow morally superior because we choose not kill someone. First, lets examine typical situations: a person who murders someone, usually for different reasons, could be for example, maybe on drugs. Then you may say, Oh he should not of taken the drugs. And then we look at the reasons he might have taken drugs. We look at the way he was raised, how maybe there was no one at all to be a role model to him, and then it all comes down to environment. To say that I would not have made these choices when I was in his position, in his mind, in his environment, with no knowledge of your current self, is unrealistic, and most of all, immoral. Of course we can choose a or b. What Scott is saying is that 99% of why we choose it is environmental and genetics, but maybe more environmental. The 1%, if there even is a 1%, is we somehow look into the future is some weird vision, and figure out how horrible life can be if the person made the mistake. But I guess that would be intelligence, which is environmental. But a germ can probably have free will though, because they act without regard to society, I guess. Who knows, maybe we come up with a better definition of free will, one that can measure each unique individual with considering what he or she had to work with.

Comment from weaponizedMILK

TueAMCSTE_Rthth

First Scott, I just want to applaud your belief against free will. The idea of free will as society looks at it at least, is immoral, especially the way its integrated in religion. People just do not want to understand that the only way for free will to exist is if everyone were pretty much presented with the same stereotypes, problems, disorders, assumptions, race, family, social environment, which would then greatly influence what society ignorantly tags as right or wrong. I know you already know this stuff, I just feel better finding someone who actually cares about the harm of the idea of free will, usually by adding a feeling of being morally superior with the feeling of innocence because of course they had to greatly resist not killing someone.

Comment from nasch

TuePMCSTE_Rndnd

There are a lot of science fiction stories like that.

Comment from kipton

TuePMCSTE_Rndnd

You know, I think this was the storyline of a "Superman" comic. His enemy, Mongul, has a plant that, when attached to a person, renders their body in a suspended animation state, but in their brain, they are living the life they desire. The story is called "For The Man Who Has Everything", written by Alan Moore.

Comment from callcopse

MonPMCSTE_Rstst

I think reducing criminality will be a good step for humankind; a first step that seems perhaps more important right now (not disagreeing with the mindless zombie thing) is lead control: http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/01/lead-crime-link-gasoline There is reasonable evidence on this one for instance there are plenty of references from: http://www.monbiot.com/2013/01/07/the-grime-behind-the-crime/

Comment from language

MonAMCSTE_Rstst

This is the model of the future for the elites. cyborgs ruled by statists, achieved thru coercive implants. Its also the dystopian future christians believe in. I wonder if it makes futurists pissed off that many of the technology gains they get excited about play into the hands of religion. Gotta love a healthcare implant that would save obamacare by monitoring your every heartbeat and sent to big brother. Would you like that mark in your hand or forehead? I watched a tv special a few months back about this guy who was so excited about having electronic implants to monitor bio signs. He was in full propaganda mode when it came to privacy. Basically he diminishes how much we have and overstates the inevitability of its eradication. Pretty obvious what he wants. Forced implantation and social acceptance of end of privacy.

Comment from TotalDisdain

SatAMCSTE_Rthth

I would hazard a guess you, Scott, accidentally slept through the movie "Meet the Robinson's" that your children (against your free will) forced you to watch. Either that or you've been playing the old Electonic Arts game "Syndicate." I keep my illusion of free will. The human body is, and will continue to always be, an engine that will always require more fuel to maintain any form of continuous level of any emotion. The dystopia you have conjured will never be cost effective at our current population level. History is rife with people who tried to conquer the world, only to be felled by a venereal disease. The masters of your prediction might not even be that lucky.

Comment from Phantom II

FriPMCSTE_Rthth

I'm trying to figure out which box would be a better fit for you. I have it down to two: B.F. Skinner's behavioralist box, or the box in which SchrÃ¶dinger wanted to put a cat. I am actually leaning toward the latter, because then I'd have at least a 50% chance of never having to read this kind of drivel again. You treat free will as though it was a horoscope. One size fits all. There are only twelve possible outcomes for today's fate, and only one of them applies to you and everyone else with the misfortune to be born in the same time period. Meat robots, hard-wired brains, blah blah blah. Don't you ever get tired of beating the same dead horse? It's still dead, Scott, and beating it isn't going to make it rear up and kick the out of you. You can't possibly be serious in forgiving all bad actions by saying the perp didn't have a choice. Of course they did. They looked at the alternatives, and chose the one that fit their needs. If they chose to perform a criminal act, then society has the right to choose to impose punishment on them, at the very least to keep them from doing it again. Just saying that you have no choice doesn't make it so. Your free will has allowed you to choose to say that there's no free will. Sounds like a great way to remove any semblance of discipline or altruism from your world view. It isn't the devil who made you do it; it's just that you never had a choice. How easy to allow yourself to do anything you want, without consequence. This post is just pseudo-hedonistic philoso-babble that leads to nothing. You really could do better than this.

Comment from mhlong47

FriPMCSTE_Rthth

Gotta wonder about all of you. This was the basic theme/climax of the movie, The President's Analyst (1966?) - the largest business at the time (TPC or 'The Phone Company') wanted to implant a minaturized phone into everyone's brain. There was one of those psuedo-scientific animations (like the old Bell Telephone Science Series) which the hero was made to watch showing how it worked and what was supposed to transpire. Supposedly he got out and 'destroyed' this true villain (which was represented by an animatronic human), but in the end, everyone had them implanted anyway, and they were all quite happy. And everyone's activity from then on was monitored by TPC and a roomful of animatronics. Oh, and they all still thought they had 'free will'. That to me was the important part. Don't mess with our illusions.

Comment from bspus

FriPMCSTE_Rthth

I don't know what is more scary. The situation you describe (blissful mind-controlled slaves) or the fact that in theory, (assuming all the technical hurdles, jailbreak hacks etc are eradicated) I cannot find a flaw in the argument?

Comment from Bixby

FriPMCSTE_Rthth

If criminals can't help committing crimes because there's no free will, then police can't help arresting criminals either, prosecutors can't help but prosecute them, judges and juries have no free will and are programmed to convict or acquit as the case may be, and jailers can't help but keep criminals in jail. So why worry about it?

Comment from jwcane

FriPMCSTE_Rthth

Judges, not juries, would have the problem. The job of the jury is to determine the fact of the crime. It's the judge that determines the outcome from that point on.

Comment from BobNL

FriAMCSTE_Rthth

The justice system is not as absurd as you make it look, even taking into account that free will does not exist. You said so yourself, you just didn't make the connection (on purpose?): [a specific brain in a specific environment will always act the same way] Now take one person with a criminal disposition, and put him in two different environments: The first environment is the world as it is today. The second environment is a place with no judicial punishments. What do you think the difference will be? I'll tell you: in the second environment, the person will commit more crimes, because his brain, which is wired exactly the same way as in environment 1, now knows that it will not be punished. And of course a person who is in jail cannot commit any more crimes WHILE he is in jail, but I stole that one from one your books.

Comment from asparaguspee

FriAMCSTE_Rthth

@hidesy - I had meant to include the term "rooted hat."

Comment from Hidesy

FriAMCSTE_Rthth

Of course, the big problem is when people figure out how to jailbreak the hats, so that they don't have to do positive things to get the buzz. Then you'll get mindless zombies that aren't being controlled by anyone. That could be fairly unpretty.

Comment from asparaguspee

FriAMCSTE_Rthth

[As far as I can see, the issue is already taken care of by Apple. At least that's how people react whenever a new product comes out, no matter how buggy or incompatible it is, people swarm to buy it. They must have found a way to tap into the pleasure centres of the brain.] workerant, I think Scott covered this pretty thoroughly with his censored "magic apple lust dust" strip: http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/lust_dust/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed: typepad/ihdT (Dilbert Blog)

Comment from asparaguspee

FriAMCSTE_Rthth

Hey, can I get me one of them hats that stimulates my pleasure centers the minute I put it on, but that DOESN'T make me do a bunch of other responsible stuff that's not me, or at least stuff I wouldn't do had I never heard of the hat? If so, count me in!

Comment from debjane

FriAMCSTE_Rthth

"Do you think the 'free will' part of the brain is attached or does it just float nearby?" I've had that 1993(?) strip posted somewhere in every dwelling I've inhabited for almost 10 years now. I had a boyfriend who hated it, though -- it made him angry. I think he just wasn't comfortable with the truth he knew it contained.

Comment from wtinasky

FriAMCSTE_Rthth

[The superstition that underpins the justice system is called free will, as in the magical ability to make choices independent of your brain's wiring.] I've never understood this argument. Laws are totally compatible with non-free-will-having criminals. They (laws) just change the reward landscape that the criminal's brain takes as input. It's called deterrence. If the expected outcome of committing a crime is jail-time, then the brain's (deterministic) utility-maximizing algorithm will steer the individual away from criminal activity. QED. Seriously, what's the argument that deterrence is incompatible with determinism?

Comment from sizzler

ThuPMCSTE_Rthth

Even if free will still does not exist it is ok to screw the prewired criminals justice as that curbs or predetermines the crimalness of would be criminals.