Ok, so hopefully we can move the spotlight off AI now that the markets are somewhat dehyping about it. In any event, the current learning models are way too unsupervised to be efficient, and when they become more supervised they will be more efficient, and we can get to AGI faster, cheaper, and blah blah blah. Moving on, moving on.
Avoiding the terms man/woman here, for simplicity's sake - let's just talk about wombs. From my notes this week, I've been thinking about how feminism, can be framed as a critique of the forced labour of people born with wombs. Up to this point in human history, there has been no recorded production of humans without the labour of a person born with a womb. Such labours may be voluntary or coerced.
All disenfranchisement of the members of the [ synthetic sexual categories ] and [ synthetic sexual genders ] associated with humans who have wombs ... stems from political pressure, from both people with and without wombs, upon a subset of the people who have wombs. This is a brief summary, but you can trace the history of patriarchy over time, and this is basically what it boils down to.
In the past century, globally, we are making more progress as a species with regards to depatriaching many governance structures in society. But we're soon going to hit a brick wall unless we start producing humans WITHOUT THE LABOUR OF PEOPLE BORN WITH WOMBS.
It's a hugely underfunded, and underresearched industry. The amount of work we have to do get from where we are now, to building synthetic organs, and then to incubating fetuses in wombs which are either harvested or synthesised ... that's a lot of work, a lot labour ( not the birthing kind ), and a lot of money.
I'm quite excited to see what we do hereon.
It's pretty much inevitable that [ this will get fixed / wombs will be industrialised ] at some point in the future. Then the tech will go through the usual cycles of "no one wants to give birth anymore", to "giving birth is a rich person's hobby".
No comments :
Post a Comment