When AI is done consuming (and it basically has, except for redundant human-human social network interactions), then will there be a renaissance of re-exploring the natural world? Without understanding its complexities I would posit we're doomed to short and ugly end. Perhaps AI is just what we need to start to re-appreciate it "at scale".
kermatt 2 hours ago [-]
> renaissance of re-exploring the natural world
I wonder if there was a period of time where people who were inclined to do that were able to dedicate themselves to exploration instead of working to pay for healthcare.
I know that's a gross oversimplification, and that quality of life is better now, but when it came to academic pursuits was it more feasible in the past?
Or am I just subconsciously reacting to constant negative economic news and wondering if the grass was greener on the other side of the timeline?
bee_rider 1 hours ago [-]
A good chunk of early science was basically funded by nobility sponsoring scientists as sort of… conversation pieces, basically, right? I’m not sure if that gig is still available.
xipho 1 hours ago [-]
One could argue all science is still funded that way. My team is funded by a philanthrophist. NSF "royalty" re-distributes the peasant's taxes to do science. Etc.
FarmerPotato 33 minutes ago [-]
E.O. Wilson would be thrilled.
khalic 2 hours ago [-]
They’re all muscle inside, fascinating
3 hours ago [-]
Rendered at 21:06:07 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
I wonder if there was a period of time where people who were inclined to do that were able to dedicate themselves to exploration instead of working to pay for healthcare.
I know that's a gross oversimplification, and that quality of life is better now, but when it came to academic pursuits was it more feasible in the past?
Or am I just subconsciously reacting to constant negative economic news and wondering if the grass was greener on the other side of the timeline?