@RandomRanger's banner p

RandomRanger

Just build nuclear plants!

4 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 05 00:46:54 UTC

				

User ID: 317

RandomRanger

Just build nuclear plants!

4 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 05 00:46:54 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 317

Firstly, power is zero sum. With regards to conflict, power is the lens to use, not wealth or positive-sum dynamics.

It's idiotic for the US to sell China AI chips. China is already trying hard to make their own AI chips and chips generally. Any big power would want to secure such critical industrial, economic, military resources with domestic production. They're not going to stop if Nvidia sells a few billion more in GPUs. Nor is China going to accept a subordinate position in the US tech stack, they're not stupid and have been playing their well-honed playbook of imitation, innovation, espionage and absorption of foreign IP. Jensen Huang must think the audience are stupid with this rubbish:

The idea that you’re going to have an AI agent running around with nobody watching after it is kind of insane. We know very well that this ecosystem needs to thrive. It turns out this ecosystem needs open source. This ecosystem needs open models. They need open stacks so that all of these AI researchers and all these great computer scientists can go build AI systems that are as formidable and can keep AI safe. So one of the things that we need to make sure that we do is we keep the open source ecosystem vibrant. That can’t be ignored. A lot of that is coming out of China. We ought to not suffocate that.

With respect to China, of course we want the United States to have as much computing as possible. We’re limited by energy, but we’ve got a lot of people working on that. We’ve got to not make energy a bottleneck for our country. But what we also want is to make sure that all the AI developers in the world are developing on the American tech stack, and making the contributions, the advancements of AI—especially when it’s open source—available to the American ecosystem. It would be extremely foolish to create two ecosystems: the open source ecosystem, and it only runs on a foreign tech stack, and a closed ecosystem that runs on the American tech stack. I think that would be a horrible outcome for the United States.

'We need open source', no, Nvidia needs open source to increase competition amongst its clients.

The amount of energy they have is incredible. Isn’t that right? AI is a parallel computing problem, isn’t it? Why can’t they just put 4x, 10x, as many chips together because energy’s free? They have so much energy. They have datacenters that are sitting completely empty, fully powered. You know they have ghost cities, they have ghost datacenters too. They have so much infrastructure capacity. If they wanted to, they just gang up more chips, even if they’re 7nm.

I’m telling you what it is. They have plenty of logic, and they have plenty of HBM2 memory.

And this is just bullshit. They don't have anywhere near '4x or 10x' as many chips because of export controls and a shortage of HBM too, because of export controls and sanctions. Amazon has more compute than all of China. Jensen is just nakedly grasping for any advantage, any line of reasoning that gets him where he wants to go, which is selling more.

First of all, the way to solve that problem is to have dialogues with the researchers and dialogues with China, and dialogues with all the countries to make sure that people don’t use technology in that way. That’s a dialogue that has to happen. Okay? Number one.

Maybe Jensen should head off and try to convince China to stop hacking every drop of IP they can get their hands on, see how that works out for him. It's just a profoundly unserious way to look at the world. Jensen's abilities have made me lots of money, so I'm not opposed to him totally. But there's this shameless inability to accept that Nvidia and US interests might not be the same. He weaves around good faith argumentation like Neo dodging bullets in the Matrix, just constantly attacking and pressing and cajoling and bullshitting. I'm not American either. But the nakedness of the duplicity is just staggering.

Even if the singularity were not imminent, it'd still be dumb to sell these chips from an American strategic point of view. AI is useful for chip development, Google has been using AI for chip design for many years now. AI would be helpful for squeezing out more yield on their inferior processes. Selling China chips accelerates their chip development. Selling China chips also accelerates lots of other research, AI cyberwarfare capabilities, military ISR and economic competitiveness generally... And he's just going on about how they need to be open source developers on the US stack, like that matters at all? It doesn't matter at all. The notion that huge companies are going to spend tens of billions of dollars training massive AI models and then open sourcing them so they won't make any money from them is absolutely retarded. Open source can only lose, in the long run. I like open source and use open source but I'm realistic about it. Nvidia doesn't open source anything if they can actually make money from it: they patent CUDA architecture, tensor cores, NVLink architecture. They're not retarded. Facebook has switched to proprietary with Muse. Even Facebook has cottoned on here.

In the Cold War the US was loathe to sell the Soviet Union advanced machine tools. It was obviously stupid to sell tools that could make stealthy submarine propellors, C&C tools with high tolerances for advanced engines. Fortunately the Soviets could mostly only copy and not innovate like China can.

Secondly, the US government and elite as a class does not accept the legitimacy of any non-liberal democracy. They might decide that it's too hard to overthrow any given power at a given point in time, that the costs aren't worth the gains at any given point. But if they have the power, they'll give it a shot. Iraq, Iran, Syria, Libya, North Korea and Russia are all to some extent considered targets. So is China. The US leadership class is not going to change its mind about this.

Even if China was a liberal democracy it'd still be very threatening because of how big and rich China is. If you read Colby's book on strategy he lays this out. If China reaches a certain level of strength, China becomes the lynchpin of Asia and the rest of Asia falls into China's orbit. If Asia falls into China's orbit, Chinese standards, Chinese technology, Chinese markets, so too does much of the rest of the world. Then China can start interfering in the Americas and undermine US national interests. The US will not have sufficient power to resist this, since it's a fundamentally smaller country. Colby makes all the song and dance about how they're only really opposed to the Chinese government... but at the end of the day we know the Chinese government has the support of the people, they're nationalistic and quite reasonably so. They want the best for their country and that means expansion overseas, in one form or another.

It doesn't matter if current Chinese leaders say they have no such interests, or even if they're being sincere. Leaders change. The US used to be isolationist and changed. Power corrupts. Huge powers have global interests, especially today. They get drawn into conflicts, they feel immense pride in their power, glory in their victories. China is no different from any other country in potential for rapacity and aggression.

Furthermore, America does not have a chance in competing with China on an even playing field. Chinese people are smart and very hard working. The Chinese system is very capable. They don't have a construction sector that squanders billions building imaginary railways. They don't have a fent zombie infestation in their biggest cities. They don't have a political class behoven to Israel. They don't have people like Jensen running around undermining export controls with their lobbying, China's economic elites obey instructions. China's internal problems pale in comparison to America's.

America would have to be 4-5x more capable per person to compete with China just based on pure population. That's incredibly difficult! Without AI, without its ever-diminishing time-based advantages in technology, America cannot compete with China. The great hope seems to be that Chinese demography falls off ... in an age of automation where China already has a huge industrial and robotics base. In an age of AI. In an age where everyone has growing youth unemployment. The demographics cope is just cope. China is huge, has enormous cohorts of highly educated young people. Demographics will not avail America.

China's optimal strategy is 'lets be friends, win-win cooperation, surely you'd never attack a peaceful country like ours, lets trade and cooperate and especially share technology'. Then once they have the technology and a giant fleet, a military budget 2-3x America's, all-domain technological superiority, then comes revenge for past humiliations, real and imagined. That's the privilege of size and intellect.

America's optimal strategy is looking for some kind of force-multiplier, a wonder-weapon that can be used to lock in its advantages. AI fits perfectly. Frankly, America has been ridiculously, impossibly generous to China, as generous to China as it has been destructive in the Middle East. America opened up domestic and world markets to China, China systematically grabbed every strategic market it could with aggressive state-backed industrial expansion. And exported inordinate amounts of fentanyl precursors and toxic social media like tiktok to America. They're playing the game. The US can also play the game and take steps to cripple and constrain China.

I don't accept that the war is over. I don't even think Trump accepts it:

https://x.com/RapidResponse47/status/2045352142253252818

"If you don't have a deal by Wednesday when the ceasefire ends, will you extend the ceasefire?"

@POTUS : "I don't know. Maybe I won't extend it — but the blockade is going to remain... Unfortunately, we'll have to start dropping bombs again."

Nor are the straits even open. Iran says the straits are open but only if you go through their route between their island, fill out their paperwork and aren't a hostile country and maybe pay a fee. US says the straits are open but not to Iran or anyone who pays a fee to Iran?

Well since you aren't on the unemployment/UBI queue yet, it follows that AI can't do your job. AI is pretty bad at using interfaces designed for humans.

But the hard part has already been done. I can prompt out a shader-evolution program, it basically evolves, based on human ratings of who propagates, generations of graphical animations, patterns of energy that would make pretty screensavers, save the ones I like to a folder.

That's easy, a couple of prompts.

Or I can have it write out fun skits, like the Iran/Hormuz situation mashed up with the "Ship Front fell off" skit: https://youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM

The raw intelligence is there, there are just certain fiddly parts and a level of precision that's missing. A skit doesn't necessarily need to be precise, if code doesn't work right you can just tell it what went wrong and have it improve. Whereas with sending payment documents to people, precision is quite important.

I use it for work too, mildly superhuman proofreading and some other tedious document processing tasks, some of which need a certain level of judgement and wisdom. Precision is pretty good. But for these I have to use my custom scripts for that specific hours-long task, scripts that I've tried and tested over some time. And they really need to be more 'document input, document output' tasks rather than 'messing around with portals and niche software'.

But that's now, they're working on making agents reliable and cost effective. Eventually they'll get there. I can't understand a scenario where it's possible to create fairly complicated pieces of custom code with AI but logging into outlook, sending emails, logging into whatever govt portal, getting a 2FA code... is some domain reserved for humans alone. In the long term either AI has to be dumb as a rock/incapable of anything but specialized tasks like chess/go or it can be general purpose, doing anything a human can do.

the UK as its current society no longer exists in 50 years. Maybe reality has to be the escape valve that forces women's beliefs to become moored to reality again.

Well does the society of UK circa 1976 exist today? Coal miners. British Steel. The Mid Atlantic accent. Roger Moore. Rumpole of the Bailey. That Britain is dead and gone, it may as well be another world.

This isn't quite a 'change happens so you should accept bad change' post. It's certainly bad if high-quality peoples like the British are dying off. But I don't think we have to care about sustainability into the long term future like we used to. 50 years is too far away. Reduce TFR to 0, why not? AI will certainly be good enough to compensate within 10 years, let alone 50.

How does TFR matter? We invest in a society that produces children today. In 18 years the kid is qualified to be an entry level worker, after 100s of thousands more in investment? +4 years for university? What is the estimated return of this? I say zero. That kid is not going to be militarily, economically, politically relevant. The AI of 2044, when he is 18, will be overwhelmingly more capable than he is. Society is a machine for producing and distributing resources, so that groups can enjoy wealth and military power. That's why we have culture and capitalism and politics.

It would of course be ideal if we had healthy, confident, advancing civilizations rooted in correct values rather than delusions. But the fact that we don't may not be fatal. It's harmful mostly in the delusions damaging or derailing the transition in this final stage of human life.

But the distinction is that I don't think we need a real cure, only a quick fix. Better a band-aid than deep cultural medicine if it takes 20 years to work. Better to burn the bond markets, state finances, TFR, climate and social trust as long as the right people control the datacentres and AI models.

I know this is kind of boring as a post, feels like it trivializes and robs the meaning out of every single issue. I think it's fine to talk about non-AI things and not have it injected with AI but I think long-term thinking at this point is a trap.

In what sense are they required?

Well the system we have has this kind of 'harmony' in that it evolves to meet the needs of the economy and the economy evolves to meet the needs of the system. Managerial state, managerial culture, niceness and rule-abiding, cancellation of dissidents because some middle-aged woman decided you shouldn't have a bank account or legal representation or whatever. And the economy gets altered by the system, so we get lots of pensions and healthcare spending and no nuclear energy. There sure are a lot of tensions and conflicts going on, 'contradictions' in Marxist terms, but the basic system remains intact.

My point is that rugpulling the economic base will rugpull the ideology too.

America is presumed to be acting in all manner of irrational and stupid ways because

they are acting in all manner of irrational stupid ways.

Firstly they started this war thinking that the Iranian people would rise up and overthrow the regime, which was stupid. Then they go back and forth unsanctioning Iranian oil to lower fuel prices, proposing dual control of the straits, now blockading Iran, threatening to destroy Iranian civilization, then constantly rolling back threats.

It's a pathetic display of weakness and stupidity as some very mediocre intellects thrash around trying to escape a self-inflicted blunder. It's exceeded only by cheerleaders dressing up the flailing as 4D chess.

Annihilating Pyongyang with what? North Korea could shell Seoul intensively with their artillery, nevermind nuclear attacks. A few measly ballistic and cruise missiles are no match for conventional artillery in just wrecking whole areas.

He consistently states he wants the benefit of the technology his company is developing to be widely distributed

But Altman lies constantly about everything. He started off saying he was running a non-profit, then weaselled out of it. Ilya hates him and accused him of lying. Dario hates him and accused him of lying. Helen Toner accused Altman of failing to inform the board about the ChatGPT launch and hiding his financial interest in the OpenAI Startup Fund.

Even in that very trial it brings out their plans to basically run off with Elon's money and make a for profit.

He might just be saying that because it sounds a lot better than 'this is my path to universal domination, you dumb, dumb fucks'. Deceptive people shouldn't be trusted.

There's a political ideology that's good at rallying moralistic middle-aged women, teachers, doctors, officials, NGOdom... They do the caring for the homeless.

But is that ideology strong with tech billionaires or high-ranking military/intelligence spooks? Billionaires and spooks are the ones to worry about with AI takeover, they have their hands on the buttons.

An economic system that produces and requires a bunch of middle-aged women in office jobs, a bunch of teachers and bureaucrats and officials and journalists, that seems to produce leftism we recognize today, just like a system that requires a bunch of professional heavy cavalry leans towards martial valour and manly vigour...

But take away that economic system and replace it with robots, we'd see something quite different surely?

This would prevent Iran nuclear efforts

Why might Iran want nuclear weapons? In large part because the US goes around attacking countries that lack nuclear weapons. Kim Jong Un sleeps at night because he has nuclear weapons. Saddam Hussein, Qaddafi and Assad are dead or in exile because they lacked nuclear weapons.

The best way to prevent Iran acquiring nuclear weapons is to negotiate sincerely, flush every piece of hysterical Israeli 'intelligence' straight down the toilet and get on with pursuing national interests, in contrast to slavishly serving Israel.

That's what Europe's general stance has been. Diplomacy, trade, win-win. The US has wrecked this and done its absolute best to make a strong case for Iranian nuclearization. Quite clearly Iran's conventional forces have failed to deter attacks on the country.

The US launched this retarded war, without any clear plan for victory, without even the necessary capabilities for victory. The US army can't be deployed quickly enough to bases that are being bombed out and would probably bog down in the first couple of major cities before even reaching Tehran. The US air force can post all these epic videos of explosions (real or decoys, nobody knows) but cannot seem to prevent Iran firing off waves of missiles and drones, cannot defeat Iran's plan to inflict economic pain until the US gives up.

Trump has played into the Iranian plan masterfully, obsessing about market manipulation. He shows weakness every day of the week, while constantly backflipping and making fresh ultimatums, then extending them. One day he unsanctions Iranian oil to lower prices, the next he blockades Iran. Inconstant and incoherent. An ideal target for a prolonged economic campaign.

The US navy can blockade Iran but cannot undo Iran's blockade of the straits. They cannot defeat Iran's plan.

European forces don't have the capability to do what the US can't, there is no reason for them to charge into the valley of death. It's egregious for the US to pussy out, slinking away from the straits with the 'world's most powerful navy' and demand their allies charge in and die, for the sake of a war that directly harms their interests.

If Russia can't take Ukraine, then how can they hope to face Europe? The Europeans can just draft a couple million men and feed them into the meatgrinder to buy time, if they're short of munitions. They have a gigantic population compared to Russia, let alone Ukraine. They have gigantic armies in aggregate, actual navies, dozens of submarines to raid Russia's merchant shipping, actual air forces with stealth aircraft... Poland is almost purpose built for this task, the Polish army is roughly as strong as Ukraine's. Probably stronger, given how Ukraine's lost most of their heavy weapons by now. They'd have a huge frontline too, Finland down to Turkey. Russia couldn't defend all that.

There's no way Europe can lose in conventional warfare against a country 1/4 their size in population and maybe 1/6th or less in wealth as long as they're united. They have 2 million troops, more than enough to deal with Russia.

really if France or UK or Germany had any stones, they'd be encouraging us to nuke Tehran as a response

What Europe really doesn't need is breaching the nuclear taboo when Russia has a 10:1 advantage in tactical nukes over NATO, when the US is openly dismissive towards NATO. Russian conventional forces are no match for Europe's but they enjoy huge nuclear superiority.

And Europe's not exactly keen on 'total energy apocalypse' as the enraged Iranians fling ballistic missiles absolutely everywhere, immolate all the Middle East's energy production. Maybe they fling some dirty bombs around too, why not at this stage? Would anyone blame them?

Encouraging a nuclear war is the absolute last thing that France or Germany would want!

Those wars were smashing successes.

I say this again and again and again and Americans still don't understand that wars CANNOT be a smashing success just by blowing things up. They have to achieve the political goal. War is politics!

Whether that's opening the straits, securing territory, installing a friendly regime, the goals are all-important. Blowing things up is only good in as far as it achieves those goals. If you fail at achieving your goals, you lose the war.

You do shoot down the overwhelming majority of the "irregular militia" levels of attacks Iran launches

That's not a thing. US missile defence consists of firing enormously expensive interceptors at cheap missiles and the cheap missiles still getting through, destroying enormously expensive air defence radars to the point that US soldiers are hiding in random hotels, to the point that the 5th fleet HQ is gone and US warships are slinking back in the Indian Ocean - unable to achieve their goal of securing the straits of Hormuz.

The US is losing the war, not least because Americans do not understand what war is fundamentally about and are very bad at it, due to this ignorance.

UAE certainly can try to strike Iranian water facilities... but Iran is a big country! UAE is a small country. UAE is overwhelmingly dependent on desalination, Iran is not. Iran enjoys escalation dominance.

Secondly, UAE is a paper tiger, they're not capable of serious fighting innately, because of what their country is. It's a cluster of hypercommercialized slave city states, not a real country. No real nationalism, no real seriousness, no sacrifice for a cause, no strong institutions.

They're likely incapable of reaching Tehran with their 4th gen jets, flown by second-rate Arab pilots.

They're barely capable of defending their own country. Brutalizing Filipino workers or funding civil war in Sudan is more their speed, not fighting those who can fight back.

Nothing is made in UAE, they just provide services and extract oil. They can't fight a 'makes things' country.

No argument from me that the other countries are idiots and would only make a mess - balkanizing Iran and running around pillaging

This seems like a whole parallel universe away from where we are. Who is running around in a balkanized Iran? Who is the victim here? The Gulf depends on desalination. UAE is a city in desert, food is imported. They are the Big Losers if this war goes badly, or just continues on its course. Iran can ruin them and they can't do much of anything. Arab troops aren't going to march out and invade Iran, they lack the motivation to fight Muslims for America and are no match for Iranians in battle.

Nobody is invading Iran, pro-Iranian militias are largely in control of Iraq.

Iran can get aid from both Russia and China by land routes, China is supposedly going to start sending MANPADS shortly, prompting more threats from Trump.

You seem to assume that Iran is a pushover, that the war is in a state of damage control, where humanitarian concerns are in play. Like deciding how much to kick someone who's already in the foetal position. In terms of power, nukes aside, Iran considers themselves to be in a strong position!

After seeing naked hostility from 'back to the stone ages' Trump/Hegseth, who is going to rise against the regime now? They'll instantly get tarred as Mossad traitors and face a very gruesome fate.

Very convenient how it lets you ignore the 90% dropoff from the first week of the war.

Oh, so the US has done no damage after the first weak of the war, in your view? All subsequent bombing has been ineffectual at further reducing their strike rate, after that huge 90% success? Maybe you're just not aware that the Iranian plan is to fight a long war, which necessitates not shooting their load in the first few weeks.

And the grand idea of what you're saying is that Iran's been totally smashed but the US navy is just too cowardly to secure the straits of Hormuz? They need to do a blockade out of Iran's strike range... for some reason. All those drones and missiles have been brutally degraded... But not so degraded that America can actually protect its bases in the Gulf. Not so degraded that American troops can quit hiding in hotels. Not so degraded that America can actually protect the oil facilities of its allies, protect the basis of the petrodollar.

Fantasy. After losing the last few Middle East wars against vastly inferior opponents, I would've thought the hubris bubble might've been pricked a little but noooooo...

If we want to leave and leave it to a coalition of local nations to ransack Iran? Much more feasible now.

If there's one thing this conflict has proven beyond doubt, it's the utter incompetence of Kuwait, Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia. The Houthis are more than a match for Saudi Arabia, they're no match for Iran. Kuwait's biggest accomplishment was shooting down some friendly aircraft, they're hopeless. Oman and Qatar already were trying to cut a deal.

They're not ransacking, these loser countries are the ones who get ransacked.

just because we haven't destroyed all the missile launchers doesn't mean that all those bombs were dropped on nothing

You dramatically overrate US airpower. They routinely bomb 'nothing'. Scudhunting didn't work well in 2003, a good amount of US bombs would've been dropped on decoys in Iran too. You just can't tell from the air whether something is a real launcher or an inflatable decoy with some IR mimicking an engine.

Note also that this is why they keep on firing their missiles and drones. Because the air campaign isn't working. A country planning for and expecting a US air campaign for decades, with weeks and months to observe the US military buildup... is going to make extensive use of decoys and concealment.

The regime may be done from this alone, just not in a time horizon that the US needs for this specific moment

Come on. We've been told the regime is done for for years now, they've been saying they were about to be overthrown by the biannual protests. Remember also that this isn't America, they don't feel the need to make constructing or rebuilding anything 10x more costly and delayed than it needs to be.

The US dropped far more bombs on North Vietnam, to no avail. Bombing does not work like people imagine, it's not capable of achieving any serious goal alone. Certainly not the anemic sortie rate the US has been managing.

I do this... In that I make AI tools for work, albeit I do test them and put in effort to make sure the quality is good. I always feel kind of embarassed for saying this since I sound like a linkedin golem. But anyway...

There's a phase transition I think from 'we slowly and expensively make a tool or an output that is supposed to work totally right the first time but still doesn't because bugs and errors are a thing and so we have to go back and slowly fix it' to 'fast, disposable code that is way cheaper but buggier, less well-thought out but more easily fixed and altered'. This is a case of old standards being applied to a new paradigm. And there are people using the new tools in the wrong way too. But this is the new way to do things and it's how more and more things will be done, just like how water flows downstream. Artisanal code will be like artisanal clothing.

The US military hasn't dumpstered anything at all. No strategic goals have been achieved. No political objectives have been achieved. The straits of Hormuz have not been secured, nor have Iran's missile and drone capabilities been severely degraded. Their attack rate over the last 30 days before this ceasefire was fairly stable.

The US has the military capabilities a 15 year old gamer would seek: prioritizing K/D and cool explosions and 'ownage' moments like blowing up leaders in sneak attacks. Hegseth exemplifies this dimwitted outlook, obsessing about lethality and violence and devastation: 'back to the stone age'.

The US does not have the military capabilities of a serious power pursuing serious strategic objectives like territorial control, waging industrial wars over long spans of time to outlast and crush enemies. That's mutually exclusive with maxxing out K/D and all these flashy, ludicrously expensive and rare wonderweapons the US likes to focus on.

You don't need to kill your enemies to beat them. Killing helps but disorganized, shambolic killing isn't the key thing. The key thing is to defeat your enemy's plan, not just blow up their soldiers. Iran's plan, using their drone and missile forces to choke the straits, choke energy exports over the course of a long war that saps US political will remains intact while the US is going through plans at a rate of knots.

Trump crows about blowing up the Iranian air force and navy. Who cares? Is the Iranian air force the lynchpin of their plans, like the German luftwaffe in WW2? No. Their conventional navy also is not a big part of their plan. Destroying random bridges or power plants - not going to help.

The only trick I know is just asking it to 'do things wisely'. I think it genuinely helps. Sometimes Opus will take some weird shortcut or do things in a roundabout way. Asking for the wisest way to do something or for a wiser approach is quite useful I think.