Because it gives powerful people permission to do whatever they want, everyone else be damned.

Both of the two major Longtermist philophers casually dismiss climate change in their books for example (I have Toby Ord’s book which is apparently basically the same as William Mckaskils book but first and better, supposedly). As if it’s something that can be just solved by technology in the near future. But what if it isn’t?

What if we don’t come up with fusion power or something and solving climate change requires actual sacrifices that had to be made 50 years before we figured out fusion isn’t going to work out. What if the biosphere actually collapses and we can’t stop it. That’s a solid threat to humanity.

They fr read Foundation and missed the fact that Hari Seldon’s preditctions fell apart very early on and he had the benefit of magical foresight.

A major problem with longterminism is that it presumes to speak for future people who are entirely theoretical, who’s needs are entirely impossible to accurately predict. It also depriorites immediate problems.

So Elon Musk is associated with Longterminism (self proclaimed). He might consider that interplanetary travel is in best interest of mankind in the future (Reasonable). As a longtermist he would then feel a moral responsibility to advance interplanetary travel technology. So far, so good.

But the sitch is that he might feel that the moral responsibility to advance space travel via funding his rocket company is far more important that his moral responsibility to safeguard the well being of his employees by not overworking them.

I mean after all yeah it might ruin the personal lives and of a hundred, two hundred, even a thousand people, but what’s that compared to the benefit advancing this technology will bring to all mankind? There are going to be billions of people befitting from this in the future!

But that’s not really true. Because we can’t be certain that those billions of people will even exist let alone benefit. But the people suffering at his rocket company absolutely do exist and their suffering is not theoretical.

The greatest criticism of this line of thought is that it gives people, or at the moment, billionaires permission to do whatever the fuck they want.

Sure flying on a private jet is ruinous to the environment but I need to do it so I can manage my company which will create an AI that will make everything better…

No but a previous history of making shit up and falsifying data along with a failure to replicate?

The guy behind this paper has the exact same issues as Schon. Plagiarism in his PhD thesis, faked data, retracted papers, etc.

They are gonna reserve the right to delete any account they want no matter what. I bet it’s in the terms of service of basically all the market places. There are a million reasons why they might want to delete an account. What if an account is used for exploiting Unisoft services. For ddos attacks. Extreme hate speech. Even in purchased games, there is clauses that make clear that they can delete your account. After all how are you supposed to ban hackers?

I’m not saying it’s right that they can do that. I think there should be regulations about what rights the consumer has and what rights the marketplace has, but lacking that, it’s common sense on the companies part to promise nothing and reserve rights to everything.

I suppose Microsoft is glad they didn;t buy SEGA then.

IMO a lot of people are here are hating on Unisoft and rightly so in regards to the SH stuff but IMO they have been taking the series in a pretty decent direction since Unity and Syndicate. The two year gap between games for example. The reimagining with Oddessey and Origins though Valhalla was a miss IMO.

Making the combat less mash click to win was great too. Like if you go back to Syndicate or even older, you can literally close your eyes in a fight or simply just press counterattack to one shot literally everything. Honestly this was something that annoyed me since Altair’s Chronicles on the PSP. People forget how guns and bows used to not even require aiming and always locked on.

People complained about the lack of stealth but I want to remind people that Syndicate literally had invisibility. You could brute force your way through every level if you wanted to in literally all the games if you wanted to. Making not stealth more fun in Origins was barely the departure from status quo that people made it out to be.

I played Oddessey in full stealth mode and it was more fun than Evi in syndicate since one shorting literally everyone from a bush was not possible for the higher level grunts (who I usually set animals on or kick them off high places) and there was more strategy since the grunts were a tad smarter with them one of a group always running off to light an alarm beacon.

I mean if there is one company that took risks with their largest franchises it’s Unisoft. Origins literally changed massive parts of the game, arguably even changing the genre. IMO as someone who tried to go back to some of the older games like Syndicate and Black Flag they are really dated in a lot of ways.