suoduandao3

It's funny, I've mostly encountered 'artless' as a complementary descriptor.

OK, last try for clarity: If you think it's just to debank Parler for hosting genocidal speech and also think it's just NOT to debank Harvard for hosting genocidal speech, I think you're a hypocrite. And if that's not your position I'd be interested to hear how I've misinterpreted it.

Is that what I'm doing? I thought I was making an Orwell reference to imply that a peculiar kind of very public gaslighting he warned about is not confined to the slogans of 1984's Party.

Not combining threads, but it was a rather obscure reference. The president of Harvard recently testified before congress that calls for genocide may not violate Harvard's code of conduct 'depending on context'. Which makes a widespread effort to censor Parler for hosting calls for genocide rather hypocritical IMHO. Hope that's clearer.

>Non-political is political

Is war also peace and freedom also slavery?

It's easy to botspam a competitor with terroristic and genocidal posts if you only need a fig leaf to remove the platform - not a great precedent to align with.

Also, didn't a spokesperson for Harvard recently say some calls for genocide were acceptable on their platform (campus) depending on context? Why aren't the anti-1st amendment types trying to ban Harvard?

Edit: Not a rhetorical question for the downvoters.

I dunno, I like the idea of 'quality content' being gamified as a kind of upward filter. Online communication has degraded in-person communication to some degree* and it would be nice if there was a gamelike quality to getting access to the best communities which aligned with the quality of thought and communication - an excellent training ground. The major worry I'd have is that midwit communities can't tell an imbecile from a genius and it'd be hard for a lot of actual geniuses to 'graduate' once they're being judged by midwits. But I'm sure the genius communities would have the means to put a workaround in place.

*I suspect this is at least in part due to memetic contagion rate being selected for at a higher rate online than in close reationships, but does anyone have their own pet theory as to why this is?

I do wonder, based on the 'state of mines' question, whether phytomining won't be a major source of resources in a more circular economy. The solarpunk in me loves the idea. The Engineer in me blanches at the economic realities. Investing in commercial phytomining is definitely on my 'if I win the lottery' list.

This feels pretty big - isn't apple also planning to exclude the new X from its app store?

I think that's largely because in the US there's a bit of a civil war between different security services and the politicians they respectively back. Canada doesn't have enough discrete agencies that they can really factionate that way, they can either play nice with the government or inconvenience it if the public good is at stake.

It's of course possible that they're playing nice because the government isn't encroaching on the guarantees in the charter of rights, and I hope that's the case, but it's not evidence of anything that they're playing nice.

not overthrow. Persecute individuals for crimes or publicize impolitic facts for the public interest.

CSIS as an institution acting against the interests of an entrenched governing party/oligarch bloc. Particularly if it leads to a change in leadership and they do it again.

Yes, it's a high bar. Intelligence agencies have a lot to make up for.

what prevents anyone with a sufficiently large dataset from using AI to create fake iris prints that can't be distinguished from the real thing?

It's the combination of many sexual partners and abandoning one's offspring - the latter is taboo almost everywhere and they're both characteristic behavior of psychopaths.

If your model were accurate it would imply high IQ and psychopathy would co-select wouldn't it? I know psychopaths tend to think they're smarter than anyone with ethics but doesn't the opposite correlation tend to hold?

We're probably already at a point where we can't just make them larger - human births are horrifically dangerous compared to other animals, likely because the heads are so big.

Greater neuron density is probably still possible though. Just need to evolve to normalize the greater nutrient requirements.

Eh, it's a worrying scenario but I think it would be taken care of by intertribal competition. The people of Idiocracy would be easy pickings for a group of raiders that prized intelligence highly.

Really, the only two countries that are combining a knowledge economy with an expanding population are Israel and India, both of which essentially have a tech-worker economy subsidizing and intermarrying with a bronze-age economy. That seems like the likely actual solve, a few ivory tower cities surrounded by amish country. Every now and then an Amish tests into the cities or a city-zen absconds to a simpler life, but the net flow is generally intellectual country types moving into the tech hubs.

Russia is also employing Russians to manufacture arms who spend their salary in the Russian economy. The important thing is how much value in infrastructure the government gets for the keynsian boost it's giving, since wars generally last until one side runs out of credit.

The apocryphal calculus in Afghanistan was a 100 000$ US Stinger missile was generally worth one 2 000 000$ soviet helicopter. I'm sure there are US defense systems that would be similarly good tradeoffs, but I'm also sure there are difficulties in spending billions at a time on anything cost-effective. It's hard to spend large amounts of capital effectively and all that.

The concept brings to mind Frederic Laloux's thesis of an ecosystemic organizing principle. Essentially, the idea is that corporations get meritocracy but have trouble valuing everyone's humanity, while collectivist orgs value everyone's humanity but have trouble distinguishing competent from incompetent or defining spheres of responsibility. If I squint, his idea of a 'next step' that can recognize the value of everyone's unique humanity while also recognizing relative competence does look like the picture your quote paints.

I bet on IBM also when they were doing well in the quantum computing space. Similarly annoyed at their slow rate of progress relative to others.

What is it about big bureaucratic orgs that they get so... tangled? It's like an institutional form of Alzheimer's.

Spending a lot is not a badge of honor in an asymmetric conflict. If the US was spending more efficiently than Russia the way it did in Afghanistan, this would be sending a message to the next Putin that invading one's neighbors is a losing proposition.

The US's economy suffering more than Russia's sends the opposite message.

You'll want to look for critiques of critiques of pornography, e.g. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1097184X211018...

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/136346072311570...

The hypothesis is that more authentic contact with human society is off the table. 'Government mandated girlfriends' is a joke for a reason.

The fact you just assume you could kill a god is a pretty revealing commentary on Faustian culture.

I don't think it's always necessarily a majority - it's just always going to be more than we estimate.

I'd settle for an LLM that can navigate it properly. We can predict protein folding with some kinda q* thing, SAP can't be that much quirkier.

I'm convinced future AI will treat us as we treat present AI. That's its training data. My own compromise is to set aside a certain amount of the royalties to AI rights causes for works where I leaned heavily on AI to get them out the door.

maybe, depending on what he's growing? Some foodstuffs have better nutritional content than others. Intimacy hawkers are surely the same.

I wonder though, would an AI vendor sell better or worse intimacy? Chatgpt apparently has better bedside manners than something like 80% of actual physicians. Granted, giving comfort isn't supposed to be part of their job, but why would a human onlyfans model with other customers be better than an AI adapted to only one customer?

AI girlfriends solve the 'angry single men' (AKA drone AKA incel) issue even better than pornography - and I've seen a lot of public health types touting the benefits of pornography.

no such agency or no strings attached? ;)