>>>>>> ..an hand-crank car keeps you in control of what's going on around
>>>>>> you, if you pay attention.
>>>>>    Why do you think an electric motor cannot do the same?
>>>> ..straw man, an electric motor cannot do the same without
>>>> AI taking control away from you.
>>>    Please let me know what AI did the Wolkswagen Beetle have?
>> ..never heard of those, I've only seen Volkswagens of various models.
>    So you agree that stating that "an electric motor cannot do the same without
> AI taking control away from you" is BS as you can and do have electric
> powered actuators without any AI.

>>>>>>   Your new shiny AI car may decide to kill you to
>>>>>> save e.g. "a more worthy person" from something really, really
>>>>>> bad, e.g. Trumpian embarrasment, e.g. because you pay attention to
>>>>>> what's going on around you. ;oD
>>>>>    First off, an electric engine starter does not have to have any
>>>>> AI built-in.  The XX century auto industry proved it.
>>>> ..and the XXI'st is now disproving it.
>>>    Present day technology cannot change the past.  Car electric
>>> starters did not have any AI, they relied completely on the human who
>>> turned the key to work.
>> ..you never seen Soviet Politburo pictures "evolve"? ;o)
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_images_in_the_Soviet_Union#Censorship_of_historical_photographs
>    Mind you, editing pictures is not changing the past.  The example you quote
> proves my point: how do you know those pictures were edited?  Because they do
> not reflect what actually happened.

>>>>>    Secondly, AI is not inherently a user alien technology, no more
>>>>> that computers are per se a tools against the users.  It all
>>>>> depends on who is in charge.
>>>> ..precisely my point.
>>>    Do you intend to live without computers?
>>> Your choice.
>> ..not really, not a viable long term solution.
>    So, why are you making all this fuss?  Just to play the Luddite without any
> intention to live according to your philosophies?

>>>>> As there is software that puts the user in charge (Free/OS
>>>>> software) and software that deprives the user of any freedom
>>>>> (proprietary software), so there is AI that just serves users and
>>>>> AI that controls them.
>>>> ..e.g. systemd is capable of "getting it done" both ways. ;o)
>>>    My home PCs do not have it.
>> ..you missed my "e.g.", and my point. ;o)
>    Which is a moot example, as systemd can be done away with.

>>>>> If this could not be, then your only option would be forsaking
>>>>> IT altogether.
>>>> ..maybe.  Eventually, that too will fail, we mere mortals risk
>>>> getting targeted "as Islamists" for _not_ carrying cell phones:
>>>> https://theintercept.com/2014/02/10/the-nsas-secret-role/
>>>> https://theintercept.com/drone-papers/firing-blind/
>>>> https://theintercept.com/2017/08/21/trump-may-not-survive-his-term-but-the-assassination-complex-will/
>>>    I did not read anywhere people without cellphones are/will be
>>> targeted as islamists, and I fail to understand how you could think
>>> those articles and the facts they relate have anything to do with AI
>> ..try read them again. ;o)
>    So, you too cannot point out any relevant line.

>> Slowly, so you can test them against your own beliefs.
>    It's not a matter of beliefs, it's just that as a matter of fact those
> pieces do not state anywhere that "people without cellphones are/will be
> targeted as islamists".  Quite the opposite in fact, as they show how US
> agencies track islamists through their cellphones, which shows that they
> actually do make use of them.

>> ..thenafter, chances are you may see part of the quite
>> likely unlikeable future that I can see coming.
>    To be able to "see the future" one ought to be capable of seeing and
> understanding the present at the very least.

>>> and car starters.
>> ..not much.  And, I see Italian history is quite different from
>> Polish history, which may be part of the context you miss throwing
>> around strawmen.
>    The fact you fail proving your point does not mean your interlocutor is
> producing any "straw man" arguments.  I am just point out the fact that
> electric motors do not need any AI to work, and all you can do to support
> this ridiculous idea is that I'm producing "straw man attacks" at you.

>> ..a skill that helps build useful wisdom:
>> https://www.highperformancelearning.com/reading-between-the-lines/
>> https://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2010/07/how-to-read-between-the-lines/
>> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Reading+Between+the+Lines&ia=web
>    "Read between the lines!" says the one how cannot read.
>    More gibberish taking the place of facts.
>    Such a useless dialogue.

>    Bye,