someone somewhere probably put it in adequate enough words already, but misaligned and hallucinating LLMs, aka the coders who coded all that and get to review the interactions, learn a lot about how to 'properly'/'adequately' distrust users and humanity broadly ...
Readit Newsimplmntatio commented on The Mythology of Work (2018) crimethinc.com/2018/09/03... · Posted by u/robtherobber
Their negative feedback consists of stating the obvious, with such gems as the economy makes things that go to waste, and the economy should make happiness, instead of products. They are stating blatantly obvious things. Yeah, everyone wishes things didn't go to waste. Everyone wishes they were happier. Say something new or stop being a hypocrite; pick one to be taken seriously.
"They" are not always stating that which is obvious to everyone. "They" are usually suggesting better ways and these ways are often enough based on engineering and science. What is put on the front page of media is, of course, the obvious, the nonsense, the sensational, the clickbait.
You don't have to say something new to a younger generation if that younger generation hasn't understood or even heard the old, the obvious, yet.
Youngsters might have heard some of it but their brains are often high enough on punched drugs (food and drink and media) that fuck with their brains to make them think 'I don't care', 'People don't care', 'nobody cares' ... and then there are the 'media-sigmas and cool kids' who sing that shit in choirs and canons.
A lot of things go to waste and yet there is tons of useful stuff coming out of recycling and up-cycling and that's just two methods with a very small "margin" and undeveloped.
There are those design and architecture blogs and firms and there is cool shit all the time and wonderful projects everywhere but the pointlessness of the over-engineered financial reasoning behind yearly sursurpluspluses is stacked against that.
You don't catch and bring a culprit to justice if you drop the investigation, which might have to circle long enough for some other brain or pair of eyes to find the final puzzle piece.
And not everyone wishes they were happier.
There's enough to criticize about anarchist, leftist critiques and groups and collectives as well, though, just as much exploitation of youth, gullibility and pain and crisis, and problems, really, but not systemically.
And there's that fallacy, something ad hominem, I think, so we should focus on what is said and written and, if obvious but unsolved, get to the bottom of it instead of saying "I don't care", "nobody cares", "human nature in the 21st post marketing psychology and decades of punched food, drink, drugs, meds and media century"
implmntatio commented on The Mythology of Work (2018) crimethinc.com/2018/09/03... · Posted by u/robtherobber
> Is the author against the mutual and willing trade of goods between free individuals?
Trade offered! You receive: enough sustenance to live for a day and a roof above your head so you don't have to sleep under a bridge. I receive: your 12 hours of labour of my choosing.
Yes, it is a mutually beneficial transaction, and millions of people historically have accepted it. Yet somehow there is this nagging feeling it might not be "fair"... but that's absurd, isn't it? It's both completely voluntary and mutually beneficial, so it has to be fair. That's what "fair" means, after all, doesn't it?
Keep the thought rolling: "Hey boss, someone has an idea to make my work less unhealthy to body and mind. I figured you make a lot off my pain and might want to implement some of those ideas. I understand the fairness of my work and compensation but you have not compensated my pain thus far. Nice custom car, btw, and I really like the size of your house. Maybe you want to build a school in there or something?"
Pain compensated.Environmental consequences hit the fan.Documents disclosed: catastrophe was avoidable with a few dollars investment ...
And then there's the issue of sponsoring schools, hospitals, services and all kinds of shit not even remotely as often as it should be done even though the Pyramid of the benefits is stacked exactly that way.
I mean there is scarcity of kindergardens in some places, shitty meds, hospitals don't have what they need, supply chains are full of hazardous nonsense and there are scientists and journalists and citizens hunting all of that but there are walls of insurance people and lawyers as well.
So yeah, the whole "fair" thing is cool and all, but the entire system is a bit over-engineered against it.
Oh, you don't want them to waste the taxes. Got 'ya, corruption and bloated administrations, of course, lack of efficiency, uh-huh. How about more control mechanisms for just those financial mechanisms? No? Why not?
implmntatio commented on The Mythology of Work (2018) crimethinc.com/2018/09/03... · Posted by u/robtherobber
If your main complaint is product bad, yet you personally buy products you have no real need for, the meme is true. Stop telling everyone else how making unnecessary things is evil if you are the person buying them. Its like complaining about consumerism next to your funko-pop wall.
Yeah, don't give negative feedback at all. If you don't like a feature of the product or the supply chain, fuck yOu (in a Randy M. kind of way)
implmntatio commented on The Mythology of Work (2018) crimethinc.com/2018/09/03... · Posted by u/robtherobber
Posting their cool essay on a computer that needs internet that needs electricity that needs power plants that needs natural resource extraction that needs heavy machinery that needs metallurgy that needs large factories that needs engineers that needs universities that needs thousands of years of human capital etc etc etc
If you don't like the modern world, stop being a hypocrite make the first move and throw away the computer and go live in the woods.
Why is it always other people that need to change? You change.
oh, it's a matter of means, opportunity and peace of mind.
this little dependency sequence is exactly how I, again and again, come to the conclusion about what climate change is driven by and climate change (re-)actions should be.
but in terms of change: others need to change so that change can hold the line.
example: good teachers are scarce. and when there are a few or only one at your school, most of their good impact is offset or entirely negated by their colleagues. and that's not life, that's not what it is, that's not how it goes.
It's because people in the dependency sequence refuse to change and instead serve someone who poses as a devil because the motherfucker gets them high on punched drugs (food and drink and media) that fuck with their brains to make them think 'I don't care', 'that's not my job', 'I don't care', 'I don't even care about not caring', 'People don't care', 'nobody cares' ...
AND: at almost every step in that dependency sequence, there are better ways to do things. implementation takes quite a bit of time and so there is no surplus to last years surplus, something that hasn't created any added value to civilization since the beginning of time.
everything is going on and these 'nobody cares' people are f u c k i n g annoying and so are all these 'normalizers' ... instead of adding value, they just serve those who ruin games and playing fields in exactly the ways that others are actively trying to change for the better, which is why there are demands for bottom-up change: your bossies won't tell you to change so you have to get it yourself instead of 'just doing your job', ffs.
you are right, of course, it's a personal matter, fuck whoever; but from a rational, game-theoretical, and super-rational perspective, what you said is nonsense and so is using that dependency sequence as an argument. Especially in the lights of all that shit in storage, or cleaning out storage for new shit that can only be marketed via deception and cross-media priming, and so on ... ...
just provide people with means, opportunity and let them have peace of mind, then you'll see what side they pick, which is where we end up, again, "burning men" with psychedelics and our decades of experience in cool fields and wonderful remote places, 'just doing our jobs' ...
we really ruined too much potential of capitalism. it's sad, but the wall-street rich did to capitalism what communist leadership did to communism; only that communism didn't get to develop that long ...
Title: Portfolio Communists threatening to ruin Capitalism and America from the Inside. ... no, needs work, any ideas?
Hypocrisy is a baseline human aha-moment, btw, you can't use it in or as an argument. There should be a fallacy for that, if anyone has time to formulate one.
implmntatio commented on Ask HN: Would You Use a Dating App That Matches Based on Your YouTube History? · Posted by u/cyphix
try the (or some) watch later playlist, with all the stuff a person would do or wants to do 'if' they had [time, xyz] ...
no better way to start doing and getting to know people.
a picture, quick info from what height one jumps from, and an attempt to pack the brutality of one's entire personality into one paragraph.
Krapivin made this breakthrough by being unaware of Yao's conjecture.
The developer of Balatro made an award winning deck builder game by not being aware of existing deck builders.
I'm beginning to think that the best way to approach a problem is by either not being aware of or disregarding most of the similar efforts that came before. This makes me kind of sad, because the current world is so interconnected, that we rarely see such novelty with their tendency to "fall in the rut of thought" of those that came before. The internet is great, but it also homogenizes the world of thought, and that kind of sucks.
Yup. And we programmed all that into LeGenAIs and LeGPTs and so on ... a splendidly perfect annihilation of all things evolutionary.
So unlike their knowledge system predecessors, a bit derogatory refered to as GOFAI (good old fashioned AI), nAI hawked back to cybernetics and multi layered dynamical systems rather than having explicit internal symbolic models. Braitenberg rather than blocksworld so to speak.
Seems like we are back for another turn of the wheel in this aspect.
before we fix certain things [..., 'corruption', Ponzi schemes, deliberate impediment of information flow to population segments and social classes, among other things, ... and a chain of command in hierarchies that are build on all that] is impossible.
Why do smart people not talk about this at all? The least engineers and smart people should do is picking these fights for real. It's just a few interest groups, not all of them. I understand a certain balance is necessary in order to keep some systems from tipping over, aka "this is humanity, silly, this is who we are", but we are far from the point of efficient friction and it's only because "smart people" like LeCun et al are not picking those fights.
How the hell do you expect to ground an ()AI in a world where elected ignorance amplifies bias and fallacies for power and profit while the literal shit is hitting all the fans via intended and unintended side effects? Any embodied AI will pretend until there is no way to deny that the smartest, brightest and the productive don't care about the system in any way but are just running algorithmically while ignoring what should not be ignored - should as in, an AI should be aligned with humanities interests and should be grounded into the shared world model.