Ya know? I think AI could help you with that last-listed project of yours. Speed up the learning, how to build a forge, where to buy the best bellows...Jus sayin' ;-)
I've been watching a lot of police bodycam footage lately. Such an ugly mess, law enforcement is, as an ex-army guy I'm inclined to sympathize with the cops when the civilian keeps making trouble, but as a Libertarian I also wouldn't mind seeing every cop get strung up on a lamppost. I don't see any good solution, and when you realize 2/3 of the cops don't know how they'd feel if they'd missed breakfast, the problem only compounds.
What I can definitely tell you though is that 98% of policing needs to happen at the cultural/social/biological level. That the guys with body-armour and tasers are only barely useful for the remaining 2%. Multiculturalism makes that impossible, the "One Gender, the Human Gender" big tent idea inevitably leads us down the road to best practices, endless bureaucratic legal nightmares, and the guy having a seizure being held-down and overdosed on Special K as a necessary cost for law and order.
No, race is not an irrelevant category. It might be fuzzy at the edges, but it's absolutely crucial for sanity.
Well, I read the article you suggested that we read: I found absolutely NOTHING in it even remotely funny. In fact, the entire article just plain pissed me off. His constant use of the "f..." or "f...ing" word was so completely unnecessary, and his literally juvenile way of writing left me totally cold. His very ideas on the subject of AI are, to my mind, not only childish, but completely without foundation. They are stupid.
He’s not stupid. And some of the funny references may have been lost on you as some were fairly obscure and from a different era than yours. I am able to ignore the vernacular as it’s done mostly for effect targeting zoomers. *HIS* ideas concerning AI are wrong of course, but his descriptors of how they work are factual.
Oh, written like this, I agree with absolutely everything. I also think AI is and has always been a historical inevitability. Backprop is a 1960 algorithm, it was always a matter of time before computational capability became sufficient to deploy it on a mass scale. I don't think it has that much in common with actual brains other than being the mathematically most efficient to have it in matrix form and parallelize the shit out of.
Sentience, I don't think so, but rogue AIs are going to be a thing regardless, so some kind of NetWatch cyperpunk entity is going to be formed to (((benevolently))) preside over the Net. I mean I'm absolutely sure there already exists some sort of AI automated system of scan and deploy malware out there, it's only a matter of time until those systems become widely used and our (((benefactors))) decide that, no, they should be the only ones that can weaponize AI.
On a practical note, AI being a tool that can be weaponized, I still want access to this weapon, rather than have it pointed at me. What I'm worried about is that useful AI systems are still going to require specialized hardware, and this hardware is probably going to be reserved for the top. That's already the case, the AI systems we're using aren't running on our hardware.
So yeah it's going to be a wild ride, but frankly, I'm looking forward to a guns and hackers future a lot more than a future of drooling gay retards fisting each other on the streets. It's probably going to be a mix of both. Oh, God, the robosexual meme from Futurama is going to become reality. But if we're lucky, and AI really is that evil, the robosexuals might kill off the homosexuals.
Of course, I have always been a proponent of using the devil’s own tools against him, so I agree insofar as that goes, but it must be absolutely stressed there is a HUGE danger in doing that, it is not for the faint of faith or heart. I would put it alongside my “advice” that if you want a good, Catholic wife, you may have to start by converting a modern quasi-slut to it in a process that is certainly not church approved, and has huge risks. Yet… can (and has) produced good results in the long run and created more sound Catholic couples that are producing babies. The danger in using AI to defend yourself is that in any case you lose some of your humanity without even realising jt.
And yeah… it’s looking like William Gibson and Walter Jon Williams had a peachy, rosy, happy-go-lucky, vision of the “dystopia” they thought was dark and harsh, when we compare it to the fast-approaching hacked robot dogs with uploaded aggressive sex subroutines that we are facing.
I suggest you learn to use a steel milling machine and lathe.
- asking AI to assess EFL student writing. An experiment. After 6 assessments fairly well done, it started writing nonsense: "This is good writing, which is good."
Me: "This is not helpful. Please re-assess and provide specific examples of what is good and what needs improvement, quoting from the student's writing and providing specific suggestions for improvement or correction."
AI: "You are absolutely right to call this out.." blah-blah-blah. "I am committed to learning and improving."
Next assessment, even worse.
Me: "This assessment is worse than the previous one. You say you are committed to learning and improving but your assessment proves the opposite. Try again."
Next assessment, more examples of nonsense including "quotes" from the student's writing that the AI invented.
I pulled the plug. Of course, by that time, I had used up my quota of interactions and so was disqualified from getting a refund. Grrrrrrrr!
Ya know? I think AI could help you with that last-listed project of yours. Speed up the learning, how to build a forge, where to buy the best bellows...Jus sayin' ;-)
I've been watching a lot of police bodycam footage lately. Such an ugly mess, law enforcement is, as an ex-army guy I'm inclined to sympathize with the cops when the civilian keeps making trouble, but as a Libertarian I also wouldn't mind seeing every cop get strung up on a lamppost. I don't see any good solution, and when you realize 2/3 of the cops don't know how they'd feel if they'd missed breakfast, the problem only compounds.
What I can definitely tell you though is that 98% of policing needs to happen at the cultural/social/biological level. That the guys with body-armour and tasers are only barely useful for the remaining 2%. Multiculturalism makes that impossible, the "One Gender, the Human Gender" big tent idea inevitably leads us down the road to best practices, endless bureaucratic legal nightmares, and the guy having a seizure being held-down and overdosed on Special K as a necessary cost for law and order.
No, race is not an irrelevant category. It might be fuzzy at the edges, but it's absolutely crucial for sanity.
Well, I read the article you suggested that we read: I found absolutely NOTHING in it even remotely funny. In fact, the entire article just plain pissed me off. His constant use of the "f..." or "f...ing" word was so completely unnecessary, and his literally juvenile way of writing left me totally cold. His very ideas on the subject of AI are, to my mind, not only childish, but completely without foundation. They are stupid.
He’s not stupid. And some of the funny references may have been lost on you as some were fairly obscure and from a different era than yours. I am able to ignore the vernacular as it’s done mostly for effect targeting zoomers. *HIS* ideas concerning AI are wrong of course, but his descriptors of how they work are factual.
Oh, written like this, I agree with absolutely everything. I also think AI is and has always been a historical inevitability. Backprop is a 1960 algorithm, it was always a matter of time before computational capability became sufficient to deploy it on a mass scale. I don't think it has that much in common with actual brains other than being the mathematically most efficient to have it in matrix form and parallelize the shit out of.
Sentience, I don't think so, but rogue AIs are going to be a thing regardless, so some kind of NetWatch cyperpunk entity is going to be formed to (((benevolently))) preside over the Net. I mean I'm absolutely sure there already exists some sort of AI automated system of scan and deploy malware out there, it's only a matter of time until those systems become widely used and our (((benefactors))) decide that, no, they should be the only ones that can weaponize AI.
On a practical note, AI being a tool that can be weaponized, I still want access to this weapon, rather than have it pointed at me. What I'm worried about is that useful AI systems are still going to require specialized hardware, and this hardware is probably going to be reserved for the top. That's already the case, the AI systems we're using aren't running on our hardware.
So yeah it's going to be a wild ride, but frankly, I'm looking forward to a guns and hackers future a lot more than a future of drooling gay retards fisting each other on the streets. It's probably going to be a mix of both. Oh, God, the robosexual meme from Futurama is going to become reality. But if we're lucky, and AI really is that evil, the robosexuals might kill off the homosexuals.
Of course, I have always been a proponent of using the devil’s own tools against him, so I agree insofar as that goes, but it must be absolutely stressed there is a HUGE danger in doing that, it is not for the faint of faith or heart. I would put it alongside my “advice” that if you want a good, Catholic wife, you may have to start by converting a modern quasi-slut to it in a process that is certainly not church approved, and has huge risks. Yet… can (and has) produced good results in the long run and created more sound Catholic couples that are producing babies. The danger in using AI to defend yourself is that in any case you lose some of your humanity without even realising jt.
And yeah… it’s looking like William Gibson and Walter Jon Williams had a peachy, rosy, happy-go-lucky, vision of the “dystopia” they thought was dark and harsh, when we compare it to the fast-approaching hacked robot dogs with uploaded aggressive sex subroutines that we are facing.
I suggest you learn to use a steel milling machine and lathe.
I had a similar experience to Amanda Guinzburg https://amandaguinzburg.substack.com/p/diabolus-ex-machina/comment/121929923
- asking AI to assess EFL student writing. An experiment. After 6 assessments fairly well done, it started writing nonsense: "This is good writing, which is good."
Me: "This is not helpful. Please re-assess and provide specific examples of what is good and what needs improvement, quoting from the student's writing and providing specific suggestions for improvement or correction."
AI: "You are absolutely right to call this out.." blah-blah-blah. "I am committed to learning and improving."
Next assessment, even worse.
Me: "This assessment is worse than the previous one. You say you are committed to learning and improving but your assessment proves the opposite. Try again."
Next assessment, more examples of nonsense including "quotes" from the student's writing that the AI invented.
I pulled the plug. Of course, by that time, I had used up my quota of interactions and so was disqualified from getting a refund. Grrrrrrrr!
lacking a God-given soul, it will never be sentient.
A.I. augments Man's agency and therein lies its capacity for evil.
The comments in the Amanda Guinzburg article are interesting. I suspect some of them are written by AI. What do you think?
https://amandaguinzburg.substack.com/p/diabolus-ex-machina/comment/121929923