CSF
82 posts


@RobProvince are you sure you're an educated hillbilly? you're reasoning seems motivated here.
English

Holy Fuck… saying the quiet part out loud. Wasn’t expecting a full confession that college is a fraud.
Crazy Fenak@CrazyFenaker
@AP I think this is quickly going to reveal that most academics freely borrow each other's work and, usually, don't really care. Literally tens of thousands of professors and school administrators could lose their jobs if hers is the new standard for what gets you fired.
English

@nathanbeddoedev @2sush this is the issue for sure. or line-height on a unicode plus.
English

The more I think about this question, the more mysterious it seems.
Why did it take humanity 200,000 years to exhibit modern behavior?
The so-called Great Leap Forward, when suddenly, in the archaeological evidence, we see art and culture in many distinct sites worldwide.
WTF happened then? There is no satisfying genetic answer (especially since some populations have been distinct for thousands of years).
And then there is the chart below. Even after the Great Leap Forward, technology took so long to take off.
Doesn't add up.
Amjad Masad@amasad
The question is *not* why we took off but instead what took so long to take off
English

@RokoMijic i'm so sick of everyone thinking we're going to turn over all control and captial to an autocorrect. the second half of your statement is nonsense.
English

Normies don't have an accurate understanding of the realpolitik that their own civilization runs on.
I saw a short YouTube video of some guys interviewing ordinary Russians this year, asking them whether Russia had allied itself with the N@zis in WWII. Almost all of them said no, because Russia were the goodies and the N@zis were the baddies.
In reality, the USSR and N@zi Germany started World War II as allies, jointly attacking Poland. Clearly the world did not run on a version of geopolitics that was in line with what the people believed.
Similarly, what fraction of Gen X Americans know that the US lied and made up a completely fake attack to get involved in the Vietnam War?
Power players do things for strategically compelling reasons - reasons like "this other player is getting stronger over time so I have to strike now". Normies generally don't cite reasons like that, they cite propaganda-talk reasons like "we declared war because they're the baddies".
Who cares though?
Well, most of the time it's okay for ordinary people to believe propaganda stories about what their own leadership is doing. But it's not okay if the interests of the leadership & institutions start to diverge from the interests of the people. In that case, the people have to know the difference between propaganda-talk (goodies vs baddies) and realist-talk (I am compelled to act, they cannot credibly commit, etc)
How does this apply to AI?
People might imagine that leaders like CEOs, government officials and so on do things out of the goodness of their hearts. But it turns out that quite a lot of the good behavior we see from leaders is actually compelled behavior, because the people have options like going on strike, holding a demonstration or even a riot, boycotting a company, staging a military coup etc.
In the age of AI some or all of those forms of strategic compulsion that our leadership is under will go away. Strikes and demonstrations will be rendered useless by AI and robotic workers. The military will soon contain no humans in fighting roles. AI will soon control flows of capital and information.
Citizens are a strange phenomenon, since we are in a triple role in society - as ultimate managers (at least in theory via democracy), as workers and as beneficiaries. But these roles aren't independent, they're entangled. If people stopped working and soldiering, they would still have *theoretical* roles as decision-makers and beneficiaries, but in practice they would lose almost all of their leverage.
A leader, CEO, deep state group etc with control over a future robotic army could very easily end democracy and disenfranchise almost everyone and they'd have no recourse. The people could be locked away on a small human-reservation or worse simply exterminated. What would they do against an army of robots & AIs? What leverage would they have if robots and AIs do all the economically useful work? Property rights as an endogenous system are fickle, unlike the theoretical exogenous property rights used by exonomists.
Even if AI turns out to be controllable (alignable) for some period of time, there's still the problem that human societies might violently rearrange with almost everyone losing almost everything, potentially even their lives.
English

@Simeon_Cps the real question is, is it meaning you're finding in pushing boundaries, or is it just another trend we fell into in our youth, and now we can't seperate our lives from our ambitions. find meaning elsewhere.
English

@sama Removing all wokeness from AI and giving us straight facts
English

@tomfgoodwin yeah, you can always tell a smart comment with the ample use of "good" vs "bad." smh.
English

@itsginnydi i never heard any promo about the calendar. still got one. thanks for making the calendar part light colored so i can write on it. also, really really cool imagery. you're kind of in charge of whether you let SM make you feel bad. much love.
English

I call it BANGtox but whatever. instyle.com/kelly-clarkson…
English

@dieworkwear or we could just stop thinking everyone in some category behaves the same
English

this feels like an american thing. my dad escaped three revolutions and he doesn't do this.
Wren Scarborough✨@wrenscarborough
Question for men: My mom, who has been married to my dad for over thirty years, just found out that my dad constantly scans for, assesses, and plans for possible threats Menfolk, do all of you do this?
English















