BANNED USER: temperamental dysregulation
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
Tell me about it.
User ID: 745
Banned by: @Amadan
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
They don't. And they may be correct.
Most artists (though not all) are bafflingly ignorant about the workings of generative models, despite hundreds of peoples' good-faith efforts to explain the situation to them in increasingly simple words and accessible illustrations. They recognize AI as an existential threat, and seem to have a purely conflict-theoretical understanding of the situation, to the extent that they just don't care about the truth and intend to gaslight everyone involved, chiefly the voters and the regulators, into accepting the narrative most convenient to them («neural networks are evil big business corporate tools to make pedophilic collages out of stolen copyrighted art») and regulating the very technology out of existence, in the same manner they use when canceling things (including AI) on web platforms and in various communities.
I suspect they have a shot at winning this. After all, generic wokeism can also be described as intellectually vacuous, yet here we are. Trans activists don't have a good case against kiwifarms, yet they've managed to drive it off the internet – now where are all those who were saying it's impossible and sensibly chuckled at doomers like myself? Any comments?
Don't underestimate the power of skin in the game, networking and pestering authorities at scale.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
You are discussing American politics.
He is uncritically propagating fake news.
I am peddling Russian/Chinese disinformation.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Well, I alluded to «what would Jesus do» prompt, and Jesus Christ is not just God and ultimate role example for Christians but a Superstar, of course. Still, he has the advantage of not being an erratic American CEO.
And even Church doesn't recommend following Jahweh's example.
They do add some confusion with the whole Trinity thing.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Prosperity and the huge gain in productivity created by the internet and the computing revolution has hardly made culture war less salient than it was a few decades ago
Salience is a subjective metric. Plebs are more placated than ever. Folks here have been losing their minds about excesses of BLM, but compare it either to the '92 race riot or the terror wave in the 70's.
There's a great deal of simulacra running wild; most are ephemeral. With actual virtual reality we may wage entire world wars that'll amount to moving bytes around.
I suppose techno-utopians wouldn't count the current condition as a win. But it is largely a product of tech, and economy built on top of technological improvements.
In any case, not caring a lot about the culture war is a legitimate position to hold, and one expected of people who are more interested in objects than in other people – as in, most STEM nerds.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
I think your persistent schtick of grilling leaders over being poor role models doesn't make for good critique. We may live in a fatherless age, but that doesn't mean it's healthy to seek a Daddy in Musk, Peterson, Trump or any other vaguely authoritative and charismatic male; thus, irrelevant if they are underwhelming in that capacity, as most remarkable figures throughout history have been, in any case. We need some way other than celebrity worship to impart values to laymen. There was a certain institution called Church that worked on that, if memory serves.
it’s the specific variant of that stuff that emerged in mid-20th century America. America has been liberal from the start, but this is a sub-variant of a sub-variant of liberalism
From a stratospheric (say Duginist in Noomakhia) point of view where Pharaohs and Plato and actual Nazis and Haredim stand on the same ideological game board as early 20th century progressivists, SJWs and Musk, it may look like «SVU» is a tiny elaboration on a basic Enlightenment take, an unremarkable niche within a niche. But that a priori search space only exists in the abstract; most of those regions either cannot be upscaled for purposes of industrial civilization, or accessed without a catastrophic transition event. Progress may not reveal the Hegelian truth of social organization; it certainly prunes branches away, and all the diversity that practically matters is the diversity we have left on the table. In this sense, Muskianism – or Thielism, or a more broad techno-optimistic «SVU» coalition – is very meaningfully different from «SJC». Space colonization as opposed to penny-pinching footprint optimization, the doctrine of growth as opposed to degrowth, supply side thinking as opposed to grievance-driven spoils system – all that is consequential, more so than speculative details of communal living and sexual mores in eventual Mars colonies. Even if it doesn't have enough verbal novelty to entertain you.
One can read the Quran and Hadiths and come up with a relatively firm picture of the ideal Islamic society in practice.
Are you bullish on Islamists inheriting California? What would you suggest to invest in?
I agree having more explicit and legible work in the ideological direction would be nice. These rich dudes should employ someone talented for that purpose, like their opponents do.
Neal Stephenson, maybe.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Well I didn't know about any of that. But I only take InfoSec advice from hackers and paranoiacs, so that's like one half of a perfect endorsement.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
They miss the fact that really winning, and not just eking out a transitory term in the white house, requires articulating a vision for the future that wins the hearts and minds of the people.
I've read this thread yesterday. It asserts that Musk stands for a compelling and coherent vision:
As Tara Isabella Burton explains in her excellent book Strange Rites: New Religions for a Godless World, traditional organized religion is in freefall [...]
Taking religion's place as a source of meaning, purpose, community, and ritual are various ideologies:
Mindfulness/yoga, tarot/astrology, social progressivism, LGBTQ+, wellness/self-care, online communities like Reddit & the Rationalist community, new age spirituality [...]
Burton identifies two as the leading contenders for the title of official civic religion:
Social Justice Culture and Silicon Valley Utopianism
Social Justice Culture (SJC): The belief that racism, sexism, & other forms of bigotry & injustice must be struck down at all costs in order to achieve a better, fairer world on which all our fates depend. The think tank More in Common estimates 8% of Americans agree
Silicon Valley Utopianism (SVU): Holds a deep faith in our ability to optimize human performance, ultimately leading to a utopian future in which humanity transcends its limitations using technology. Includes subgroups like Rationalists, Transhumanists, & Effective Altruists
While they might seem to be at odds, they are really two versions of the same underlying belief: That the orthodoxy of the past must be abolished in order to usher in a bright new future for humanity, one that treats personal experience as the ultimate source of meaning
[...] With all this in mind, Elon's purchase of Twitter isn't just a business transaction. It represents a hostile takeover by the SVU of one of SJC's most sacred sites – as if the Palestinians occupied the Temple Mount and began using it as a base of operations
Not defending the Temple Mount frame or California-centric analysis, I have to admit that the Civic Religion angle is apt. As @2rafa observed, my support of most tenets of Muskianism is essentially irrational and quasi-religious, following from my basic Cosmism (that Musk, as a deathist, unfortunately disagrees with) and qualified belief in technological solutions to problems that, while social in nature, partially follow from scarcity and technological limits.
Compared to SVU or SJC, what do libertarians offer in the marketplace of ideas? If they know what's good for them, I think they should position themselves as a minor sect allied with the former church.
Likewise for many others. The vision of SJC is totalizing and unforgiving to competitors, being rooted in absolute zero-sum philosophy.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
I keep referring to this page and advising against extreme trust in protonmail.
Technically this is possible through a combination of options 1/2 and a ban on non-rich people having children, but I'm thinking of darker futures (for the victims) here.
Oh geez. Who radicalized you?
You could be interested in reading up on FHI's Windfall Clause, «a policy proposal for an ex ante commitment by AI firms to donate a significant amount of any eventual extremely large profits garnered from the development of transformative AI».
As you know, I expect some sort of 3 (which makes me unremarkable here). For the purpose of novelty, let's discuss a variant closer to 1, where the size of the plebeian population, or more likely its resource expenditure, is capped at some absolute value or a modest share of total economic output, while their political power to negotiate a bigger cut is tacitly of explicitly eliminated. This will necessarily mean hard caps on access to transformative tech, from radical life extension to transhuman self-modification, to AI or mind upload creation/access, to raw energy/matter utilization, to types of structures allowed to control and the very software primitives allowed to conceive of, and in my book will be not much better than Eating The Poor (or, bluntly, Not-Powerful – all those «financially independent» smartasses go to the chopping block just the same), though of course I'd rather be rate-limited to the normal 2020's life expectancy and subjective abundance than culled, more or less obviously, in like 3-15 years.
In fact I do not expect life to get any better than it is now and would be pleasantly surprised if it never got way worse.
The argument for it is long-term trajectory of more egalitarian scenarios. The class of people who'll benefit from ownership of transformative AI will be fairly small, unusually intelligent, conscientious, good at optimization of business processes, and long-term oriented. In two words, high-agency. We already see the outline of this elite group. If a half-ape like me can think about eventual cool and useful things to do on an astronomical scale, to scale my agency up, they ought to be able to feel it already. It might be akin to Anders Sandberg's plan. As you can see, in 10k years Sandberg plans to not only contain multitudes but let them out, which is to say, there'll be some big N of Sandberg copies doing various fancy things that'll require substantial compute and matter (seeing as all low-hanging fruit will be picked before then). Altman observes, correctly, that there's lotta energy in the universe – but not so "lotta" as to make the question of apportionment moot. N Sandbergs are N-1 plebs who don't get equal agency to a sandberg copyclan.
Crucially, Sandberg expects his copies to broadly share the same value function, thus he is more than happy to share with them his allotted fraction of the Cosmic Endowment. Barring copies, I'd bet he'd be equally happy with people sharing his philosophical outlook, aesthetic and interests; and probably personal friends, relatives and such (though I'd trust him to not be obscenely clannish). Obviously, that selects against 99% or more of the Earth's population.
Sandberg is just a public speaker – but we can expect actual AGI profiteers to reason along the same lines, and be more clannish at that. And are they wrong?
Suppose we naively equalize this power, or just adapt current political institutions to it, such that in a few generations a plebeian can secure resources to start his own copyclan and bite off some share of the light cone. What would they make of it? Would they not devolve into puddles of high-maintenance hedonium? Or, worse, would they not spill into ugly rat races over artificially scarce artifacts to secure positional goods, invent increasingly absurd sports, flaunt their cognitive limitations, vote for some even more buffoonish Trumps, and generally mode-collapse into God-monkeys replaying behavioral loops from Savannah? Worst of all, would they not succumb to Moloch in His basest form, the Blight from Sandberg's own worldbuilding exercise, like Scott warned in his meditation?
I'm less of an elitist than you, and you're far from the worst offender, but frankly it's very hard for me to imagine that, if I were to make the decision that people upstream of of Altman or Hassabis will soon be positioned to make, I'd have the heart to play Prometheus. I would, however, try to spread the prerequisites of high agency. I'd be enticing baseline humans to partake of Ambrosia, the Fruit of Knowledge and the water of Mnemosyne before giving them Fire.
But that's only in hopes of increasing the share of actors who'd be motivated and capable to do interesting things with what they can take – in other words, who'd be capable of being reasoned with and similar to me, similar enough to not have great regrets about ceding effectively the whole light cone to them. In terms of outcomes, it's not that different from inflating my own clan or copyclan, only more humane (and local traditionalists would say it's actually more evil than just letting them die). And the chance of success is lower – as you say, «unlikely due to lack of public buy-in».
Power dynamics do not send people who'd take such risks out of idealism or aesthetic preferences to the top.
Conveniently, utilitarians tell us that human lives, happiness points and QALYs are fungible, so it makes little difference on the cosmic scale if you uplift the current 8 billion half-apes, or let them expire (but ethically, e.g. doubling down on addictive entertainment production, SusTainaBility propaganda, birth control and child substitutes and industrializing this novel Canadian practice of recommending euthanasia to unhappy poor people), and generate a more aligned population from the small chosen seed.
The big difference lies in odds of success, so the choice is straightforward – even without the brute consideration of kin preference.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Think of it like blockchain: we can trace the lineage of a specific modern Y chromosome to historical forms with fewer novel mutations. Thus, haplogroups can be represented as a branching tree.
There are many millions of living male descendants of Genghis, vastly more than for any other male of his era. Seeing the geographic distribution, they must have substantial percentages of his autosomal DNA too. Statistically, there should be plenty enough data to reconstruct his genome from theirs with >99.9% coverage. This is entirely explained by the fact that he was very sexually prolific and that his family, clan and society have been dominant for a long time.
Why would I be insulted? That's all true, down to the trouble with missing or unnecessary articles (I despise the very notion of a definite article). I've been advised to agree to this career path, too.
Might even be flattering – that article is making rounds, apparently. Months ago, I've asked a Swedish guy what he makes of it. His conclusion was the same as the consensus here: BS.
Nevertheless, I think we have enough legitimate leaks and official admissions and absence of satisfactory responses to accusations coming from European figures to tell that such undermining of European economies and sovereignty and poaching of talent is, if not a proactive policy, then certainly not a negative scenario in the eyes of Anglo/American State Security. (We might even suspect that such immediately discredited fakes are part of the master plan to hide the truth, like in Eliezer's Meta-Truther 9/11 story). There are only two decent objections: «what if the europoors figure it out» and «strong Europe benefits the US»; neither is particularly watertight. As Russia grinds itself to fine paste on Ukrainian fortifications, Europeans become increasingly irrelevant, and they don't have a choice of allies anyway – not like they can turn to China; neither will they be of much help in the coming war, so the expected value of prolonging the agony of the Western half of Eurasia and maintaining appearances is below that of quickly reindustrializing the US and dealing with the East.
That's a cynical way of looking at things, but what can I do. Half a year ago I've written on «great replacement» and the same epistemology should apply here – adjusted for greater secrecy and moral particularism of spooks.
Some links from mainstream sources:
-
Wikipedia, The Wolfowitz Doctrine: «Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. … We must maintain the mechanism for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role.»
-
The Guardian, Key US-EU trade pact under threat after more NSA spying allegations Espionage: «The impact of the Der Spiegel allegations may be felt more keenly in Germany than in Brussels. The magazine said Germany was the foremost target for the US surveillance programmes, categorising Washington's key European ally alongside China, Iraq or Saudi Arabia in the intensity of the electronic snooping. … Under the international intelligence agreements, nations are categorised by the US according to their trust level. The US is defined as 'first party' while the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand enjoy 'second party' trusted relationships. Countries such as Germany and France have 'third party', or less trusted, relationships.» Note however that American sources at the time were pooh-poohing this whole narrative.
-
National Review, Lord Ismay, NATO, and the Old-New World Order: «The purpose of the new treaty organization founded in 1952, Ismay asserted, was “to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down.”… Ismay, a favorite of Churchill’s and a military adviser to British governments, had a remarkable sense of history — namely that constants such as historical memory, geography, and national character always transcend the politics of the day. … Lastly in his triad of advice, Ismay referred generically to “Germany” — without specifying a contemporary friendly and allied West Germany, juxtaposed to the Soviet-inspired, Communist, and hostile East Germany. Again, the East–West German fault line existed in Ismay’s time; yet he reduced all those unique differences of his age into a generic “Germany down.” … Once again, if there were not Angela Merkel’s increasingly defiant Germany, it too would have to be created. Some in the United States were troubled that Angela Merkel, from a beer hall in Munich no less, recently lashed out at the United States and promised that Germany might just have to navigate between the U.S. and Russia — quite a thought from a Germany once saved largely by the United States from its own carnivorousness and later likely Communist servitude.»
-
Bloomberg, Macron Accuses US of Trade ‘Double Standard’ Amid Energy Crunch: «“The North American economy is making choices for the sake of attractiveness, which I respect, but they create a double standard” with lower energy prices domestically while selling natural gas to Europe at record prices, Macron said at a news conference in Brussels following a meeting of European Union leaders.»
-
On Twitter, a video of some French guy who's allegedly an Economy Minister: «I think it's time for us Europeans to tell our American friends that we are very concerned about the Inflation Reduction Act and that it could cause the deindustrialization of Europe.»
-
Peter Zeihan on the same topic: «And so Biden's general position is: you can suck it». A few of my regular opponents are Zeihan stans, share his smug attitude towards Old Worlders, so it's neat to have it on record.
And so on and so forth; if someone is to make the case for EU as an independent pole, I'd rather it was an actual European.
Ultimately it doesn't matter, Europeans have sovereignty but not enough sovereignty to weasel out of this global house of cards collapse. The strong do what they want, and the weak suffer what they must. Putin is generally correct in his theoretical understanding of geopolitics; the only issue is, he ignored most dimensions of strength and was deluded regarding ones he believed all-important.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
The US that, out of the blue, murders its plausible competitor is the US that cannot be «the leader of the free world». I think you're overly cynical with regards to the ideological homogeneity of the West in the 80s-90s. Other nations still possessed some living culture and autonomy. It'd have been a massive shock, and would have reinvigorated the project of the independent EU with nuclear, Russophilic Franco-German core.
That would've been a very hard situation to reverse. The actual course proves to be risk-minimizing: the Chinese are happy enough to beclown themselves and implode.
Christ almighty, I had no idea that there are so many statistically literate whores around just waiting to tell you your survey is bad.
To drive the point home, these women affect being really anal about methodology – despite being, like you note, often unable to parse the trivial study design. I wouldn't scoff at that merely because of their occupation, escorts aren't street workers and may well be above average in intelligence (though Aella is of course still an outlier) – it's more of a conflict of interest, Upton Sinclair moment, and as is common, it's misguided territorial instinct – they won't get more clients nor higher incomes by making the conclusion of the study or Aella personally lower-status on Twitter.
Crucially, they have strong guild/cabal ethics with their talk about «community» and how she's «new», and a weird idea of the purpose of ethical research guidelines. Or... maybe their idea is the correct one in the current climate?
I've collected their responses (not up to date) because it was just such a perfect example of motivated reasoning and middlebrow dismissal, it reminded me of mainstream skepticism directed at politically incorrect findings we discuss here more frequently, namely HBD. See also: artists and AI, audiophiles and double blind testing, {your own example}.
I don't include links because my goal isn't to bash their looks (by the way, it's not like she got dogpiled by conventionally overweight hookers).
dunno if you have the research qualifications for something with such heavy implications; SW solidarity is something I'd be researching too, but that's just my opinion and I could be wrong.
guessing you are pretty new; also it's <19 not >19 if you wanna get fatphobia correct
You should re-do this with a bigger sample size and more accurate earnings. I would separate full-time and part-time maybe. Fssw and kink etc.
You’re not very connected to the community bc you disregard valid criticisms and emotional reactions (yes emotions matter, ppl aren’t robots) from a wide array of its members
You think you’re right bc you make a lot of money but most of us know better than to equate those things
I don’t think she should be doing it at all unless she herself has a genuine and broad community connection which she doesn’t.
The world doesn’t need another privileged white swer sharing their uninformed opinion on the industry for attention.
Soooo many things wrong with this. A sample size of 30?!?! Mo. income is estimated (by the researcher, not the respondent)? Only using online escorts when many SWs work exclusively in person creates additional bias. Additionally,BMI is outdated & <19 is unhealthy for most people
I have always been a big girl, and if I was making that small amount of money, I would not be a veteran, and still be working in this industry. I am also a older provider well over 40. I actually make more money when I am bigger then when I am smaller. You data is skewed.
If we are speaking of averages, then it would be a very excellent idea to enlarge your focus group. What joke.
This is flawed. Income in this industry is highly dependent on the providers location and touring (if they are available to). Then how much they are willing to place into their marketing (pics, websites, etc).
Calling this “data science” with a sample size of 30. Lol.
She said herself the sample size was “still kinda low”. Her own words. Also implies she is still collecting data and released her unfinished “study” anyway, Mr blank profile.
Also does not check out in my experience. I know big gals making way more than I do. She has even admitted to not being able to get good data because she’s not connected in the industry.
Wildly inaccurate.
Anyone who knows anything about statistics will know how laughable this is. Stop this embarrassment of our community.
"If your sample isn't representative of your population, then you can't make valid statistical inferences or generalize. " where is your sample size? Where is your scientific methods and statistical evidence. You're not proving anything you're making wild inferences in a...
She put out this graph without any context or background, it's just not appropriate method. This is what causes an uproar and when it is found to be false results are swept under the rug because its not as interesting. Graphs are misinterpreted all the time why are you so upset
I’m not giving my data to a woman who thinks she knows better than those of us who have been at it for years. She thinks lawyers and doctor who pay 1k an hour won’t hurt workers and her “advice” is gonna put people in unsafe situations. Also tracking BMI is not a useful metric.
You just love being loud and wrong, huh? I’m honestly impressed at the way you manage to make every tweet worse than the last
I'm fat and make 6 figures.
You couldn't be more wrong.
Stop the lies and perpetuating stigma.
You're a stain on this industry.
“BMI (body mass index), which is based on the height and weight of a person, is an inaccurate measure of body fat content and does not take into account muscle mass, bone density, overall body composition, and racial and sex differences, say researchers from the Perelman School”
As a researcher myself, this is straight up terrible research design and thus garbage findings. Maybe sit down and think about research design and ethics before you go around 'doing research' ie confirming your own biases.
I’m no statistician, but the holes in this methodology are truly incredible. Not to mention the use of BMI, which is a hugely stigmatising metric that fat people have asked people to stop using FOREVER. There are better uses of your time than whatever this is.
I had to read the comments because i couldnt believe someone would do something like this about body mass index. Theres so much fatphobia, classism and whorephobia in one graph. Also as a data scientist why are you using n=30 and no standard dev or error matrix? Bro
This is ridiculous. Look at my photos. They’re accurate. My BMI is 28.6, I make 30k on my worst month.
Y i k e s
Stop it.
Girl... just stop
It’s men in the comments thinking it’s accurate smh
Lol where did you pull this fluff from. Highly inaccurate
This is really stupid lol
this is disgusting, useless and inane. but good that you manage to stay busy i guess.
Why are you doing something this offensive to a community that u just became a part of??
Your provingmy point -your new to this. Only fans hasn’t been around long & is already known to be problematic by far. Content is only a aspect of SW & more removed newer aspect. Please be respectful-your behavior almost reads like your intentionally trying to rile your community
Flipping through your TL your online poles, interviews, etc are incredibly problematic. Maybe pay close attention to the backlash your getting from everyone
She’s not an escort -she’s an O F girl -she’s just promoting not accurate tires tropes that the general public like to push & she’s arguing, blocking & getting a offended that actual real escorts are telling her she’s wrong. It’s obvious
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
All I can think is how sad it is that most everything's so lame and retarded and pointless – the war, the culture war, the zero covid war, the economy, the sacred cows. Even as the machine intelligence aims at superhuman heights, humans seem committed to degenerate to protozoa. This Brinston guy is the Nuclear Fuel Czar, give or take. In a more high-T world, he could've become a supervillain. He could've created a harem on a secret island. But instead he's... stealing women's luggage in airports? Purportedly for fetish reasons? Like, what? What is this, cringeworthy ecchi anime?
On the other hand, it seems that he pushes for novel reactor types, so that's pretty cool. Would be a pity if that project falls through due to his kleptomania.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Eh, it was an innovation, but I think the whole thing was another wave of Steppe expansion in a long series, just in a more historically aware period, making them a popular reference point. Maybe I'm unfair to Mongols.
Agreed. Well, I don't want to be too harsh, being one of the few here on record in favor of CCP's Taiwan operation, specifically due to the TSMC factor (though I have doubts now); but the point is – nationalism isn't some unique and rare essence, dependent on TFR (like Hanania argued), or particulars of local culture and history and ethnography (indeed, this is Putin's mistake that's costing me my country), or whatever Moldbug can concoct about reality of languages, or any other galaxy brain justification for denial of reality where large armies are not hard to man with volunteers.
For decades even in the least developed regions, centuries in more fortunate ones, we've been living in the era of nation states, bonded by education and shaped by conflicts with peers. However aristocratic and superior one feels or affects to be, it is crucial to remember that modern «plebs» aren't literally premodern peasants either; when struck, they don't surrender or break ranks and run to their little peasant huts in the boonies (like, say, Russian Empire's conscripts often did, folks who identified far more strongly as Tambovians or Kaluzhians than Russians). People are ideological and political, they identify as citizens of a given national polity, take pride in that fact, like their countries (and Taiwan is more deserving of affection than most); and universally despise their wannabe imperial conquerors who pontificate on historical destinies of peoples and seek to philosophize with cruise missiles. People take even verbal, to say nothing of violent, attacks on their, genuine or imagined, collective sovereignty personally – and that alone can make it real.
If the Taiwanese aren't «blood-and-soil nationalists» yet (doubt), they sure will be when first missiles land. Judging by the history of 24.02.2022, in a week they may begin clamoring for the genocide of «subhuman, ethically inferior, natural slaves» on the continent.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Seconding @2rafa, but for other reasons – what are you even disagreeing with?
It's commonly accepted that Mongols qua Mongols have been culturally infertile and left no posterity, certainly none commensurate with their success – sans, tellingly, the ancestral cult of Genghis and the story of pilfered riches. No catchy songs, no great monuments, no political treatises. Their military doctrine also didn't become some dominant paradigm. Peoples who suffered under their yoke have more to say of Mongols than Mongols themselves have! Modern scholars try to learn of Mongol institutions through Crimean Khanate!
I doubt they were all that genetically successful, though. Genghis was. The footprint of the whole tribe is not exceptional in proportion to their numbers prior the expansion.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Gotta close the gestalt at least.
Artemiy Lebedev, the self-appointed Graphic Design Guru of Russia, has a famous note in his «Kovodstvo» (... «'Idance») blog: Idea worth negative million bucks. It's all very fair and clever and biting, it's only a shame Artemiy would've been a nobody without his illustrious mother, and his contribution to Russian design is probably measured in negative billions.
Regardless, I understand the contempt that doers feel for idea guys (and ChatGPT shows just how commodified random combinations of premises can be made). It's the same sort of contempt artists on 4chan feel for «prompteurs». Prompts can be auto-generated ad nauseam by a shell script, Greg Rutkowsky had to polish his craft for decades.
Mayakovsky was, presumably, like Rutkowsky. He wrote:
**Poetry
is like mining radium.
For every gram
you work a year.
For the sake of a single word
you waste
a thousand tons
of verbal ore.
But how
incendiary
the burning of these words is
compared
with the smoldering
of the raw material.
These words
will move
millions of hearts
for thousands of years.**
I don't like Mayakovsky or what he moved people towards.
I'm an idea guy. Ideas are like stick figures. But not all stick figures are created equal. One will never become as good an artist as Murata, and it's possible, likely even, that Murata believes himself to be a greater mangaka on the account of his ability to make technical artistic choices; he's wrong and it's a tragedy that One has to compromise with him in producing an artistically competent work. Frankly, One's time was wasted on learning to draw. It'd be proper for him to stick to his figures, and let someone like Oh!Great experiment with styles, to then use their finished forms at his discretion. This is one aspect of AI's promise for human creativity – distilling forms of talent, to recombine them without crippling compromise.
In any case, defining the inherent worth of artistic work through choices made feels odd.
For me it's not a matter of choices. There are instrumental choices made along the way, but mostly just mechanical effort towards crystallizing the idea into its finished shape, reverse-diffusing it from noise towards a predestined output – If I were to abuse this metaphor again. Suppose my fingers are cut off and I have to type with my tongue, or use some BCI with 15 characters per minute; that'd be the end of my participation here – just not worth the time; and moreover, it'd probably be impossible to finish any meaningful piece while the idea is alive and breathing (this post was not finished in time, and so it'll never be 1/5th as decent or 1/3rd as responsive to you as it should've been). It's a fragile thing – a true (pardon my hubris) idea; it's far more than a random seed. It's chosen near-instantaneously from an infinite murky space of triviality, grasped, and the ability to see its glitter is what matters; while this ability is perhaps developed and polished in some relation to iterative effort dedicated to implementation, it has a dimension that lies outside the entire artistic craft and has more to do – with some talent, of course, but more interestingly with unique human experience, that inner achievement which shitty Twitter illustrators purport to convey but probably lack; unlike artists whose fame they hide behind. Rubén David González Gallego has cerebral palsy. He has proven one can be a compelling writer in even worse circumstances than my hypothetical; I can't help but wonder how much more he'd have given the world without his handicaps. Quantitatively and qualitatively more – for the same reason of the impermanence of inspirations. And contrariwise, were it possible to diffuse faster, typing or rather altering the text – or other canvas – at the equivalent of 1000 char/minute globally, improving the work in its every point as the brain sees fit and as an algorithm can do – hoo boy, how some idea guys would shine.
Or not.
We are ankle-deep in the sea of generated creativity, both technical and ideational – watching the tsunami wave as it crashes down. I hope that when it recedes, the survivors will discover some jewels in the wreckage, something essentially solid and irreducible to combinatorial glass bead game guided by random seeds. Some true ideas. It's in our interest that they remain human-made.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
The idea seems to be that «a hypothetical», as a form of syllogism, has some minimum complexity/minimum description length that cannot be represented in a mind that has e.g. working memory corresponding to a given IQ – the minimally sufficient thought, even optimally chunked thanks to experience, just breaks down from noise and signal decay, in the same way complex mathematical expressions or rich verbal statements or puzzles break down for people of somewhat higher level.
That model strikes me as implausible because a basic hypothetical is very simple and people who struggle with understanding that ought to struggle even with speech.
On the other hand, using a hypothetical in practice usually involves thinking through some scenario diverging from known reality, which recruits imagination and a mental scratchpad with some non-negligible context length. So there are at least two levels of understanding – a hypothetical is an asymmetric function of sorts; you can check if it makes sense, but you're not necessarily able to use it as the first step in a reasoning chain that the other party's trying to prompt you into. In that case, it's prudent to concede your failure, drop the entire line of argument and just output the «okay smart guy, not listening» before you're tricked.
Of course intelligence is heterogenous (modestly so, given that g accounts for most variation, but still), and hypotheticals of different nature ought to be unequal in MDL. Additionally, Wason selection task shows that some ecologically valid concepts allow for efficient application of what seems to be the same basic algorithm – we don't have general-purpose theorem provers in our heads, more like a population of heuristics and cached partial solutions for specific cases. So people can be «good» at some hypotheticals but flounder when provided a novel one. Weeding out those specific cases is what good test design is about.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Might it be closer to 130 than 160? Sure, but he's not dumb.
He's dumb – for what he got into.
I say often that merely-smart guys like Sam have a tendency of pegging themselves, like, 20 points higher than they deserve, fancying themselves premier league players; and that can have catastrophic consequences for their circle and many others. Bill Gates is, by all accounts, a genius; he was appropriately arrogant for his level when young, and now he has matured into a superficially humble guy with wide latitude of expertise who can afford pretty large-scale shit.
Top-tier colleges are supposed to help with that by exposing a smart guy to actual geniuses and forcing to recalibrate. Certainly helped Bezos..
Would SBF be teaching law at Stanford in your world?...I suppose that could reduce the damage, but the idea is funny.
My opinion of Dennis Prager is roughly the same as Norm Macdonald's one of Hitler. And freedom of speech etc. etc., no disagreements here. However, here I must say that I understand where he is coming from (except the «If the Holocaust is a fabrication, Americans died fighting against nothing particularly evil» part – come on man, just pretend you give a fuck about tyranny and, say, mass killing of Slavs). It feels strange to put into words what a Jew has apparently failed at conveying to a sympathetic another.
The point is as follows. The number of Jews killed in the Holocaust is not just a sacred cow nor an academic sticking point. Six million – considering the incentives of researchers such as perceived immorality or danger of lowballing, maybe a biased estimate, but still close to the center of mass of my a priori model – is near the totality of Jews that had been living by that point on the territory controlled by Germany. As Praeger says,
Beginning in about 1941, the Nazi regime dedicated itself to murdering every Jew — man, woman, child and baby — in countries it occupied. Eventually, more than six of every 10 Jews in Europe were murdered.
Them having been killed, whether via gas and those absurd shower contraptions like mainstreamers insist, or indirectly via starvation and neglect, like some revisionists effectively tell it, regardless of proportion by method or nuances of timeline or sensational claims about particular cruelties, indicates the successfully pursued intention of a complete eradication of a people wherever possible – an intention one can derive from arguments in Hitler's magnum opus already. This clear intention is the main reason I feel disinterested in investigating revisionism (although I know that the mainstream can get stuck on asserting blatant lies, as the case of HBD shows). And, therefore, it is qualitatively different from killing hundreds of thousands, like in some vastly scaled-up impulsive pogrom. It was, indeed, a genocide, and it means that, were the Axis successful in its ultimate political program, it would have been the end of Jewry globally, the final death of Israel.
Jews, in my experience, have stronger sensitivity to existential threats than European peoples, to an extent that, I suspect, they cannot quite believe the difference, and mistake fringe right-wing white identitarian groups for «mask-off» evidence about the sentiment pervading, mostly subconsciously for now, the totality of the race. Must be an unpleasant mental space to inhibit. But they're still the sane ones in this relationship; and Europeans are abnormal by the standards of humanity, too liberated from the longhouse ethics BAP despises so, too collectively autistic and ethnically suicidal to recognize and feel viscerally what makes a genocide so «particularly evil».
Perhaps, as an autistic person, you're closer to white Gentiles in this regard.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
How is this responsive to anything in this post? Mentioning white supremacists (not even anti-Semites) in that response was uncalled for, suggested Hoffmeister specifically being one, and was irrelevant to your points in favor of ignoring Cole and other revisionists/denialists; you could just concede that instead of getting under his skin.
In principle, a white nationalist could well be – at least with regards to some groups – a white inferiorist, so to speak, i.e. employ the generic logic of protectionism against stronger competition*, only appealing to racial solidarity instead of something class-based. And this isn't mere logical possibility – despite your disdainful «waffle about» that implies some duplicity or triviality, this was a major justification for laws against Chinese immigration in e.g. Australia and the US. 1886 act was a unique and consequential precedent, an expression of popular consensus of majority-white working class in a society we can safely label white nationalist today, not some trivia about obscure HBD dudes with 50 followers who say that acktchually Asians have higher IQs so we should be allowed to say Blacks have lower ones (which is how I suspect you view those arguments). A white supremacist, meanwhile, can have any opinion on the worth of coexisting with non-white people, from a disgust-based call for segregation to a preference for casteist hierarchy.
Those are all clear distinctions, and it does seem uncontroversial that modern white nationalists are – almost by definition – against coexistence with non-whites within the same polity, regardless of their views on relative merits of races, particularly on market-relevant parameters and not some fundamentally moral, aesthetic or philosophical ones.
*that said, I must admit that these protectionists tended to be, in their own words, supremacists. I dislike this sort of hypocrisy: if you have to shelter your people from competition, have the integrity to admit that your people are weaker, at least in some relevant sense. But actions speak loud enough.
Kiwifarms has been dropped by a number of ISPs and this blockade may well escalate. Certainly they receive less sympathy than their opponents and aren't feared as much.
I wouldn't expect much from China, it took them about 3 years to stop ruining their economy with Zero Covid mandates and roughly 10 times as long to merely begin acting as if they realize the costs of one-child policy. For now they're apparently more concerned about generative AI's potential for depicting Chairman Xi as Pooh (or otherwise unflatteringly), so they're banning non-watermarked images. I've seen Western artists extol this move as a step in the direction of protecting their precious rights.
I do not think any but the most rabid artists are seriously banking on this kind of fundamental triumph (some are very rabid though). They're more or less okay with OpenAI's work and do not notice Google Imagen etc. at all. Their winning scenario has more to do with denying their clientele the opportunity to cut them out, introduction of royalties for centralized AI corporations using datasets with artistic content, prohibition of independent (especially local) end user content generation, and its stigmatization on par with CP content; probably some certified-artist-only subscriptions (in the same vein as access to some scientific data is limited to only .edu emails).
This can succeed and go beyond the domain of art, especially if aided and abetted by other parties interested in centralizing AI tech (e.g. longtermists, national security).
More options
Context Copy link