I glanced at other papers this author wrote and yikes! He’s not exactly a brainiac. Lots of nonsensical jargon, trendy “woke” words, delusional thinking... and apparently he is at Deakin U in Australia which describes itself as a “progressive, innovative and open-minded university.”
Why is “tolerance” and “inclusivity” always assumed to equal “good”? This is not accurate. There are plenty of things to be intolerant of and plenty of reasons to exclude things. Things like pedophlilia and perversions. Things like people preying on kids. Jeezus.
A 50+ y.o. guy bothers a bunch of teens, they ask him to leave them alone, but he refuses. One girl in particular again tells him to leave and then he punches her in the face. As a response, everyone piles on him. He falls into the water, comes back up with a knife hidden in his fist, and stabs 5 teens using prison-style shanking (disemboweling one and injuring 4 others). One teen dies. So, the conclusion is “eff the jury” for convicting him of reckless homicide and it was the fault of the teens for getting stabbed/killed? I don’t see the logic here.
Of course. It’s automation. You only need a few people who can run/maintain the AI. Perhaps you will still need a few warm bodies to deal with escalations or trickier things, but certainly not as many as before. Welcome to our Brave New World.