melpomenesclevage

you're not gonna get one.

a reflection of who is in charge of it

not even that. it's an inherently more regressive version of whatever data that person feeds it.

the two arguments for deploying this shit outside of very narrow laboratory uses, where everyone was already using other statistical models.

A. this is one last grasp at fukuyama's 'end of history', one last desperate scream of the liberal order that they want to be regressive shit heads and build the abdication machine as their grand industrial-philosophical project, so they can do whatever horrible shit they want, and claim that they're still compassionate and only doing it because computer said so.

B. this is a project by literal monarchists. people who wish to kill democracy. to murder truth and collaboration; replace it with blind tribalistic loyalty to a fuhrer/king. the rhetoric coming from a lot of the funders of these things supports this.

this technology is existentially evil, and will be the end of our society either way. it must be stopped. the people who work on it must be stopped. the people who fund it must be hanged.

AI would be fine. we do not have artificial intelligence. full stop. none of the technologies being talked about even approach intelligence. it's literally just autocorrect. do you know how the autocorrect on your phone's software keyboard works? then you know how a large language model works. it's exactly the same formulae, just scaled up and recursed a bunch. I could have endless debates about what 'intelligence' is, and I don't know that there's a single position I would commit to very hard, but I know, dead certain, that it is not this. turing and minsky agreed when they first threw this garbage away in 1951-too many hazards, too few benefits, and insane unreasonable costs.

but there's more to it than that. large (whatever) models are inherently politically conservative. they are made of the past, they do not struggle, they do not innovate, and they do not integrate new concepts, because they don't integrate any concept's, they just pattern match. you cannot have social progress when decisions are made by large (whatever) models. you cannot have new insights. you cannot have better policies, you cannot improve. you can only cleave closer and closer to the past, and reinforce it by feeding it its own decisions.

It could perhaps be argued, in a society that had once been perfect and was doing pretty well, that this is tolerable in some sectors, as long as someone keeps an eye on it. right now we're a smouldering sacrifice zone of a society. that means any training data would be toxic horror or toxic horror THAT IS ON FIRE. this is bad. these systems are bad. anyone who advocates for these systems outside extremely niche uses that probably all belong in a lab is a bad person.

and I think, if that isn't your enemy, your priorities are deeply fucked, to the point you belong in a padded room or a pine box.

what's the difference between profit-taking of private companies for government companies, and naked corruption?

that's not a joke, somebody please explain this to me.

and it's altadena, which was recently the hub of some pretty big mutual aid efforts, so there's a chance some of that might actually happen!

if you're poor when you get the money, you still get taxed for being poor, and the sin of class mobility. only money made AFTER you get rich is safe.

no but see it's not violence at all, because it's against minorities. so it's fine. whereas the mildest fraud of your bank is literally worse than the holocaust.

uh huh. I think the value of stuff should go to the people who made it, who can, individually or as (a) group(s) maintain their own fucking tools. or towards a broader project of building a society. I don't think concentrating wealth or some edgelord bullshit about greed being good are sustainable healthy or sane ways to structure distribution of resources in a society.

no but see it's not propaganda if it validates my worldview.

because capitalism needs to function like cancer. shit's built on old imperialist logics, where you must always be claiming more. red queen's race bullshit. or cancer; pick your metaphor.

it must be profitable because while productivity increases, due to imperial conquest and advancing technology, the profits of the owning classes (remember; this is the literal definition of capitalism-value being produced by owners rather than workers. yes it's insane, they are insane, this system is insane.) must also increase.

the fact the working class have no more to squeeze from just means we get closer and closer to slaves, which is maybe intentional, maybe just a cool bonus for them.

there's a cool poem that explains it. check out part 2 https://poets.org/poem/howl-parts-i-ii

it was a response to someone saying vandalism isn't nice.

and to be fair; they are nazi not-so-dog-anymore-whistle cars.

...need help?