rottingleaf

joined 1 year ago
[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world -1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (8 children)

Are you fucking serious asking that? Do you even understand why some things are wrong to do and some are not?

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago

Funny how yall seem to like it shredded, I prefer half-transparent thin slices on a fat-fat piece of bread.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world -1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Well, in the Soviet example everything was government.

And governments seem to be so excited by the prospects of this "AI" so it's pretty clear that it's still their desire most of all.

EDIT: On telegraph and Panama you are right (btw, it's bloody weird that where it sounds like canal in my language it's usually channel in English, but in the particular case of Panama it's not), but they might perceive this as a similarly important direction. Remember how in 20s and 30s "colonization of space" was dreamed about with new settlements supporting new power bases, mining for resources and growing on Mars and Venus, FTL travel to Sirius, all that. There are some very cool things in Soviet stagnation - those pictures of the future lived longer than in the West against scientific knowledge. So, back to the subject, - "AI" they want to reach is the thing that will allow to generate knowledge and designs like a production line makes chocolate bars. If that is made, the value of intelligent individuals will be tremendously reduced, or so they think. At least of the individuals on the "autistic" side, but not on the "psychopathic" side, because the latter will run things. It's literally a "quantity vs quality" evolutionary battle inside human kinds of diversity, all the distractions around us and the legal mechanisms being fuzzied and undone also fit here. So - for the record, I think quality is on our side even if I'm distracted right now, and sheer quantity thrown at the task doesn't solve complexity of such magnitude, it's a fundamental problem.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

At the same time "global economic integration" and "global trade" including outsourcing of production to countries with cheaper labor were sold to the populace as a logical continuation of liberal democracies. Increasing efficiency, thus increasing the level of life. That the level of life also depends on having leverage, and moving critical production outside means reduction of leverage, nobody thought (well, the majority of population didn't think that, bread and circuses).

While this is a system old as humanity, Chinese imperial bureaucracy and Roman one and Assyrian one and Persian one worked like this, to build hierarchical systems. Troops quelling rebellions in one province are from one in the opposite part of the empire. Troops fighting wars in a province are never local, because wars between empires always involve stimuli to change masters. Bureaucrats are too foreign, everything is foreign and not reliant on locals. Even food and drinks are sent from other provinces and tightly guarded - despite that being far more expensive then than now.

So today in a western country all the digital products are made mostly in other countries, all the electronics are made mostly in other countries, much of the food and much of the clothes and much of everything. And this is treated like the good free western way of life. The further from WWII, the less everybody feared such a situation.

While the firmer is integration, the harder it's to leave it, and the harder it's to leave, the less meaningful any freedom is - your vote matters only for the bosses in you part, and they have the combined power of the bosses to deceive you, to misdirect your vote, or to plainly steal it, or to go around it.

Historically integration built empires.

The USSR, a recent example of an honest attempt at autarky, which is often used as an example of who tries autarky and why, didn't really try. It's the other way around actually, in 20s it was rather democratic, in 30s it was basically buying foreign technologies and machinery for gold and grain for everything (that's the Stalin's industrialization), in 40s too (war and all), and the only parts of its history where it really was trying to do autarky significantly enough was during the Thaw and Brezhnev, and while that didn't work so well, that's also the most democratic period of its history.

But at the same time high autarky degree means lower level of life. I've been excited with Trotskyism once, despite most of time being a ancap. Because, well, it involves direct democracy and mass participation in all political activity, and no career bureaucrats and politicians, the need for that is substantiated by any limited minority of politicians or bureaucrats being possible to covertly threaten, blackmail, buy, groom, etc.

I don't subscribe to their "democratic planning of the economy using modern means of computation" thing - I agree it's possible if Amazon is doing just that on scale far bigger than needed for a government in one country, don't get me wrong, and that demands fewer resources than all this "AI research around", but there's inherent degeneracy in such a planning system because, as a specific example, you don't know you have to design and produce a good that would be in high demand but isn't already produced.

I think Trotskyism in many of its parts is still very good, actual participation not only is beneficial for the system, it also gives the populace the psychological understanding that politics is not about casting your vote once or twice for the guys who frighten you less. Feeling of holding the wheel. Personal responsibility and ability to change things for good. These are important exactly to compensate worse level of life (locally worse, because good level of life combined with tyranny eventually becomes worse too) emotionally, because otherwise it'll be impossible to institute a political system nobody wants.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago

I meant that they can only have so much emotional and mental resource after doing their real job and not the day one, but this is possible too

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

Disney made a point of building an original Star Wars plagiarism based on the majority stereotypes, as opposed to fan stereotypes. So where the common stereotype and the fan stereotype would diverge, they deliberately chose the common one. Like the whole thing being about space wizards and pew-pew.

I think sometimes that maybe the "second generation", after the original creators get old or full of fans' shit, is usually not very talented, so all it does is grab money and take revenge.

I wonder sometimes if in the framework of that logic all KK was doing was taking revenge on Star Wars fans for upsetting George, and similarly all Sergey Brin, Mark Zuckerberg and such were doing was collect power based on what Sun Microsystems mastodons and Unix fathers and such have done, and take revenge on the wide populace which didn't value it all.

As in - your typical fan of it all blames MS, Google and such for the way tech became shitty, while the tech bosses blame the populace for choosing shitty and making the good companies bankrupt, and think they are humiliating that populace deservedly. Similar with Disney Star Wars.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

Seems like you’re making a a bad faith argument.

Seems why? For me it doesn't seem so, and it likely won't, but maybe you can add some detail.

I dunno, for me Door Into Summer is harder sci-fi, but Foundation is harder sci-fi too, and Starship Troopers is harder sci-fi, and Dune is harder sci-fi as well, and Citizen of the Galaxy is harder sci-fi, and one can go on. Pilot Pirx is very hard sci-fi, and many other things by Lem.

Star Trek is not more similar to those than Star Wars.

Pew pew lasers and swords and magic is hardly technologies’ potential impact on humanity

Mockery is not an argument in itself and would somewhat hurt your main argument if such were made.

 

So, I'm autistic+BAD(+possibly ADHD) and my parents were both idiots when I was a kid.

They both thought children only take making right choices from their parents, not parenting work. Or only surgical excessive parenting work where they thought it was important (which wasn't always good too).

With my mom it was her NPL and the fact that her parents were both not very responsible, with my dad - I think he secretly knew he's autistic, but was terribly afraid of that and thought only autistic kids need parenting and I'm normal or something delusional like that.

So they picked a school with a not very good kind of people being prevalent, children of government workers mostly, and not the lowest caste of those.

Somewhere around 16yo I had learned nothing of substance other than drawing dungeon plans and reading fantasy and sci-fi and fan-fiction on those, and I was trying at computing things, but it was hard and mostly imitative talk, like you'd do imagining a sci-fi story. At the same time sometimes quite pretentiously, while feeling myself mentally impaired (couldn't concentrate or keep myself on actually learning things). And I felt like in prison in that school, and the worst was the feeling that I might become one of those kids (this wasn't possible, was probably a trap and so on).

So I'd intentionally try to distance, sometimes via actively insulting that whole layer of society and their idea of authority. The paranoid idea is - that the little bitches and some of their teachers recorded my words and used them as a prank on someone quite respectable from my point of view. Possibly even real-time. Say, a person big enough to be present in some BSD Unix manpages. And a few other such pranks, with the overarching goal of somehow hurting me. And a few of the people around that man decided to take revenge without checking.

What's important in that paranoid idea is that those people might have had different reactions and done different actions. Some might have done pretty bad things until realizing that they were wrong. Some might have behaved right from the beginning. Some of those might have been sorry upon learning that, some not. It's as if this story were slowly traveling behind my back and people would first start telling me something with indignation against me, and then decide it shouldn't be told to me.

And I have a habit of insulting people in the Internet.

So - my progress since then might have seemed like a flat line (even though it wasn't), and I'm both worried about that being known to the people who've reacted properly, upsetting them, and about the possibility that I, with my habits, might have insulted some of them.

And it sometimes feels very needed to reach some of those people and check that they are not too disappointed and this is not such a big deal.

The question of whether it's a psychotic idea or gaslighting is important because of executive dysfunction and having yet achieved far less than I would want to have.

In general this fear becomes weaker every time I have something like a hyperfocus, but that happens rarely and usually involves exploring something for a token toy to keep, and not learning or doing anything further in that area. In very rare bursts, most of the time is wasted.

It's a bit like vibe coding inverted (and not just in coding, but in making POV-Ray renders, drawing, writing poetry, making themes for FVWM, generating ambient music, whatever), where with vibe coding the process itself doesn't matter, while here the functional result matters less than the vibes of a working program or a configuration or a rendered picture (I think with renders this isn't different from the mainstream though).

So, to partially close such a gestalt, I'd have to do a useful project, but that's the thing - I have done toys complex enough (though messy and ugly) and requiring understanding of the tools and the problem. But I have never done useful and conformant things of the same scale. It's as if I physically couldn't do big things that are work, only big things that are play.

And probably to really reach some of those improbable people ; which doesn't seem a good idea both if it reminds them of something bad and if it doesn't.

So. No question, though advice is welcome. Just learned there's a community with such a name and decided to share.

EDIT: FFS, feels like exhibitionism.

view more: next ›