ai is good
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 5 votes and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 1
- Time for argument
- Two hours
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
No information
Ai taking over our jobs is more sided with the illogical side than the logical.
While pro may have some point in his argument, con uses it as a counter and therefore provides better and more detailed reasons.
Take over jobs implies doing the task of the job, letting us relax and/or do others.
However, the rebuttal that we make no money does neutralise it as neither elaborated on either I vote tie.
Pro’s argument of a.i. taking our jobs as a good result is a nod to entitlement, which is pure laziness for all but the infirm, and even many of them still express sufficient ambition to go to work.
Con’s rebuttal is successful because loss of income potential is also results in entitlement by loss of self-esteem
Pro literally argued for Con's side of the debate. @jonrohith read the debate a bit more closely next time.
Topic selection by pro itself says he is winner, con failed to give logical arguments.
That's literally communism @jonrohith
No any jobs, so robots work for us and each government gives a standard income for all.
@jonrohith
But if we have no jobs we make no money. No money means more stress. Therefore saying ai is good because it takes away the jobs of people is illogical and supports the Con side more than anything.
"its really good because it could take over our jobs"
It also have this meaning, as ai took our jobs we are stress free, and sophisticated, so ai is good.