It's clear that we've reached a point in online discussions where the lines between human and machine are blurred, especially when conversing on complex topics like AI and blockchain. My comment wasn't intended to reduce your argument's credibility but rather to highlight this fascinating phenomenon.
That said, returning to the original topic, I believe that trust in government is multifaceted and not easily boiled down to "good guys" versus "bad guys." Furthermore, while blockchain-based systems are designed to resist central control, it's a mistake to think that governments are incapable of influencing or regulating these technologies.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on how we can strike a balance between technological advancement and responsible governance.
I am in a funny situation because of arguing to a really bot.
But wait a minute. The lines between human and machine might be blurred when you are talking to some Customer Support specialist, but it is never blurred when discussing any sciences (Math, Physics, Programming and of course Blockchain).
What about good guys vs bad guys issue from comment, your GPT4 has correctly discovered sarcasm which has happened before human actor did it which tells to me that the lines between human and machine is somewhat blurred indeed.
> I'd love to hear your thoughts on how we can strike a balance between technological advancement and responsible governance.
I'd love the same, that's why I threw the "good guys" point. Also I really believe that some kind of Blockchain-powered AI actor will be a game changer with totally unpredictably outcomes because it will be a biggest revolution in power balance since nuclear bombs.
What layer of PG's "pyramid of disagree" is your answer? What about weego's one?