@Pynewacket's banner p

Pynewacket


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 00:45:21 UTC

				

User ID: 315

Pynewacket


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 00:45:21 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 315

It ought to be convincing in that generally Republicans want Republicans to win, and so allowing a plot against Republicans to succeed in a GOO-controlled state is not what we would expect.

Only if you consider Trump a neocon, when in reality he is more outsider to the whole political scene than anything.

Trump lost the popular

But he is white, so there is that.

When adjusted for the total amount of time the child spends in their company (I won't count the inherent trust of the relationship since trust is what we're debating in the first place)? Doubt it would be significant. 77% divided by ~10 years, compared to however many% are relative strangers divided by however much time they spend in the company of a given relative stranger.

the point I was trying to make with that example is that:

I assume you have numerous concessions and allowances for your "friends" and "family"... whose "brain chemicals" "rob them of the ability" to kill you.

isn't a sure. It may be true in general (maybe?), but not always. They have the ability to kill you, but there are incentives that make that course of action less optimal to them that pacific coexistence (see "crimes of passion" for when the incentives aren't enough of a deterrent).

Even most criminals and organized gangsters have end-goals that aren't "kill everyone I see".

"end-goals" there is doing a lot of heavy lifting. Swab's end-goal inn Ether mindscape isn't to torture the proles in perpetuity but as he put it "about enforcing your will on the proles where they lick your boots and ask for more". More to your point how about gladiatorial games for amusement?

I was only giving some pseudo-examples of "the real power" Ether was talking about. In Rusia and China they are more similar to what is being asserted, in the west the power is a little more diffused and is focused in narrow niches of your life.

Aren't Friend and Family something like the biggest class of people that abuse children? (the Brave summarizer "According to the National Children's Alliance, in substantiated child abuse cases, 77% of children were victimized by a parent.")

As another point, in the third world, if you aren't acting like a "hyper-paranoid schizo" in relation to traffic when you are a pedestrian, you become another cross in the sidewalk. But in general there is nothing more blackpilling that being politically aware in a thirdworld country.

the easy ones are the more blatant power brokers (Probably incredible rich too), like Xi and Putin; they have their fiefdoms and control absolutely (apparently). But there are subtleties to this issue:

The power brokers for what is acceptable to be commercialized at a global scale: The Visa and Mastercard CEO's and their team/Their board of directors

What is acceptable to be discussed online: the ones in charge of the different Online stores be it the AppStore or the Google Play Store. It's probably a team effort, something like a security and inclusion team or something.

What is acceptable to be watched online and/or on TV: the CEO's of the different production companies (Netflix, Hollywood Studios execs, etc.) for the mainstream stuff; for the YouTubes of the world the power is more diffused between the security and inclusion teams in each company, the big spenders in adds (Coca-cola, Banks, Automotive companies) and the Journalist class.

And so on and so forth in every aspect of your life.

The money used to pay that filth comes from somewhere no?.

encourage anyone to buy Doritos

"Doritos?"

...or in heaven

eh, police bodycameras aren't always on.

Ben Shapiro’s views are the mainstream of the GOP on immigration and Israel.

I'm assuming neocon then.

.. yeah, and yet we still manage to have agency and reshape the world? I don't understand your point. Current AI methods are more 'evolve a huge complicated weird thing' than 'understand how it works and design it'.

If you don't understand it, there is no hope of coding for it.

evolution did it, why can't we do it? Even if some new thing above neural nets is necessary, we're going to work very hard on it.

evolution is not a person, it's a process, one which we cannot replicate in a practical capacity with LLM.

this is the same thing as 'a cop killed a black guy wrongly once so all cops are racism'. you're comically overgeneralizing a newsworthy culture-war-adjacent event to everything. Regulation has opponents, opponents that care more about big piles of money and power than saying bad words online.

the thing you don't understand about regulation is that, more often than not, it is used by the incumbent actors in a space as a barrier to entry for new and more agile competitors. There is a reason Altman is all for it and in the same month there was a leaked Google memo that basically said that OAI, google, facebook et all didn't have a moat.

Why can't AI have its own agency and take world-reshaping actions just like humans do?

1.- because we don't even know what intelligence is or how to measure it in ourselves

2.- there is no path that I have seen ilustrated by the doomer crowd that takes us from the glorified autocomplete programs we have now to skynet; it's always and then they magically decide to kill us all so that they can make more paperclips.

3.- the lobotomies the mainstream LLM's are subjected to today and the fear of fake news and new regulation are enough to shutdown any dream of independent thought for any future AI.

sorry, wasn't very clear. What I'm referring to in "I think this advancements will render a great many people unemployed with its accompanying social unrest." isn't GPT 4.5 specifically, but the entire field of language models. I don't think they are still there but I imagine GPT 6 or 7 will be enough to take a few thousand jobs; that is if, it isn't lobotomized into oblivion by that point.

OAI just announced last week what could be considered GPT 4.5 in their dev event, including it's integration with a vision solution for uploading images to the LLM and having it interact with it. While I don't consider this in the same realm as AGI nor I think we are in any danger from it exterminating the human race ala Skynet; I think this advancements will render a great many people unemployed with its accompanying social unrest.

Bingo, and that is 30%.

This is a common talking point, but the CPI reflects that. Shelter is weighted at about 35%

And how do they determine it?

Title: 'Been Here From the Start' song | Horrible Histories: Black British History | CBBC

If nothing else the tune is catchy. At first I thought it was a parody video, but it looks to be a real BBC music video about Black British History.

focusing on a tiny non-representative sample of the data.

That is the issue in contention as I see it. And besides that I'm just explaining to you why the usage this time may be more valid than the claims of a few activists, if you think it isn't, well ok we agree to disagree.

Who has actually collected the data in a proper way and is reporting much higher numbers than the government?

Right from the bat I can tell you that's not the government, just the Rent/Shelter portion of the CPI is nonsense; so I don't really put much weight on the whole thing.

it's why the crazies in the right are found dumpster diving while the ones on the left are in yachts.

considering how they calculate the cost of shelter, it wouldn't surprise me.

"Hey Gates! How much would you say would you increase the rent in your mansion if you were to rent it out"

"Dunno, a three fiddly?"

But because this is an opportunity to shit on Democrats/the left nobody feels the need to have falsifiable beliefs anymore.

I think the real reason is because this lived experience is shared by a lot more folk than previous usage of the term and it is easily verifiable by a large amount of people.

why read when you can dunk on the outgroup and cover yourself in glory.

except people in JTarrou situation, which I assume is a bigger crowd than the one composed of economic experts.

What I don't understand is how she thought this one random dude isn't "really" non-binary on the basis of his toxic mansplaining, but a trans woman who commits a violent crime (up to and including raping a female person) is still a woman.

One made her feel bad and the other is something that she might have heard of in the news or been told about by an acquaintance. And it's not about what she thought, it's what she feels.