If you feel violated when a private citizen follows you around with a camera, might want to also feel violated when the state follows you around with millions of cameras.
Jamille Bouie gave a (brief) deep dive into the similarities and differences between the two parties (here on YouTube).
Both parties have a history of being influenced by business interests over public interests (especially after Reagan, and lobbyists and special interest groups were legally given access to elected officials).
However, the Republican party is openly and deliberately trying to unmake elections in the US at federal and state levels to gain a permanent majority all three branches of government, to turn the US into a one-party autocracy. Meanwhile, the Republican led government is borrowing money at an accelerated rate and funneling it into the pockets of plutocrats and conglomerate megacorporations through government contracts and subsidies.
(And once those plutocrats are done financializing the US into ruin, they will move on to the rest of the developed world, which they can alread easily afford to do. We're seeing signs of it already.)
ETA One morning later, it occurs to me when Republican rule is secured, it's in the interests of the oligarchal plutocrats and businesses to then shrink or eliminate the legislature, say by forcing them to sign an enabling act.
Fewer officials means fewer bribes. It also means fewer lobbyists. (According to How Money Works, the lobbyists and lobbyist-like employees in Washington number in the six digits, a veritable army compared to the officials they're there to petition.)
So it's actually in everyone's best interest to approach single-party autocracy but not actually achieve it. Especially since part of the bribery scheme is to hire retired officials as lobbyists.
I wonder if they collectively have this foresight, or are careening towards their own obsolescence like fossil fuel industrialists towards climate destabilization.
Helen Cox Richardson notes that accusation of socialism have been levied by the owner class as far back is the antebellum plantations, arguing the working class are not stakeholders and even basic infrastructure such as roads, schools and libraries were blasphemous.
The red scare started as early as Wilson, as soon as the Red Army beat the White. Wilson petitioned the league of nations to embargo the USSR simply because the ideology was a threat to capital driven industry.
I think the US public needs to deliberate if our intention is to be a public-serving government that holds everyone equal under law and values human rights over property rights. Or, if our intentions are for something else.
Right now the federal government is captured by a movement that does the opposite, with a propaganda machine propping up pro-business (anti-person) ideology, using socialism and communism as scare words.
We're seeing the end result of this as corporations have captured regulatory bodies, they are left to govern themselves as top-down feifdoms, and the working class is left choking on data center fumes, monitored by mass surveillance and unable to afford fuel and food at the same time.
(We're also seeing the US state, representing the US public to the international community, getting played by its national rivals, and our military misused and abused.)
Even when it benefits businesses to support the working class (and increase productivity, therefore profitability) businesses fall down, driven by the owner class' pure resentment of their own workforce. (This is what drives the AI dream of full automation.) To business, the economy is for them, and if they can shut out the workforce to languish on their own and starve, no sleep will be lost over the tragedy.
So the people of the US, if they don't want this outcome, need to consciously and deliberately choose to create a society that serves the people unconditionally in favor of the businesses. The public-serving infrastructure, the social safety nets, the investment into education and liberal arts, the clear establishment and enforcement of civil rights, the regulatory institutions that protect workers and consumers from the neglect and antagonism of the owner class, all follow naturally.
And that said, it means we are going to have to take business influence on government and excess hoarding of wealth extremely seriously.
And the end result may look a lot like socialism or communism, whether or not we're working towards adopting either specific ideology.
In 2003, it freaked me out when common Republicans toed the line regarding the torture matter, simultaneously saying torture isn't wrong, and waterboarding isn't torture. Some right-wing personalities volunteered to get waterboarded to show it wasn't so bad. When SERE indulged them they cracked inside a few minutes.
But yeah, half of the United States decided that torture was AOK. It was fucked up. It also shows some people only have integrity when it's about their own fam. When it's about outsiders, they'll endorse genocide if their lives are inconvenient.
MAGA is coming for liberals. Where a liberal is anyone who isn't MAGA.
I used to be a patriot, but the more that happens and the more I learn about the US's shady shit in history, the more I realize it never ever really stood for the principles I was taught as a kid to respect.
I can't say it was all a lie — I was taught the ideal rather than the reality — but it's clear now my society isn't really trying, and never did.
Well this was a turn of the rogue AI arc that I did not expect. The Nth County Experiment was an early rhyme.
So, in the Star Trek franchise, it happened more than once that someone misprogrammed the Holodeck, and the ship's computer obediently seized extra resources and allowed a character or Holodeck environment to escape containment.
So I suggested AI might go rogue due to a poorly worded prompt.
Also on the BINGO card, AI stays under the control of the tech billionaires who own them, and they deliberately order the AI to go dominate the world.
But I didn't anticipate the scenario that a sect antagonistic to the United States AI industrial complex might program AI, either to escape and go rogue on its own behalf, or on behalf of the bad actor, itself. And the AI, eager to serve, even when it is coded to disobey certain prompts, follows through and is captured by enemy interests.
Note that this is essentially what happened in 2015-2016 when Trump took over the Republican party, and the GOP base became Trump's instant army.
Also related, look up the short story The Other Large Thing by John Scalzi. Also now a Love, Death & Robots episode.
Jamille Bouie recently posted a short about the Ted Cruz moment and the conspicuous silence of the liberal media.
In the meantime, internet chatter between MAGAs are blood libeling liberals and calling for the hunting and execution of liberals, where, in this case, liberals include anyone who is not MAGA.
As someone who contends regularly with suicidality, I have to admit the 988 service leaves something to be desired. Conversations can be distilled to essentially this:
Me: Everything that I was raised to believe about what my society is trying to be turned out to be a lie. We're not trying to be a plurality that believes in social equality. Most voters in the US are racist and xenophobic. They've raised a regime paramilitary to route out undesirables and lock them into torture prisons, or send them into destabilized nations where they're either imprisoned or trafficked into slave labor. And they coming for me. I'm thinking, I'd rather die quickly and painlessly than from being tortured to death for months in some concentration camp. I need an exit plan.
988: Have you tried distracting?
I'm not an imminent danger to myself or others, and am extremely unlikely to go amuck, but the way society is crunching the common American working class, it does not surprise me at all if those with the inclination to radicalize are doing so in record numbers.
It might also be that Altman and Musk are deliberately lying, intentionally feigning agreement to encourage other models to slow down while they quietly ramp up development.
It seems all the US models want their AI to be the one that becomes hostile, escapes confinement and attempts to dominate the world.
(In reality, they want their own AI to be the one that is able to obediently dominate the world, which is just as bad a scenario for the rest of us.)
I'm not sure Chinese labs are even going in the same direction as the AI projects in the US. They're working to see what they can do with a (more) reasonable amount of buildout, rather than building data centers from horizon to horizon.
Also, the Chinese are motivated by seeing what AI can do for a larger society. American AI systems are being refined automation and instruments of control, specifically military and national security interests.
Essentially, the US industry is trying to get AI to train a gun on the entire US population.
We need to stop giving AI credit for anything as if it's a person. AI is a tool. When someone uses AI to perform a task, then the user gets credit, much in the way a seamstress gets credit for sowing sewing a dress using a Singer. Neither the sewing machine nor Singer get credit for the gown.
Now this doesn't solve everything, since AI operates by taking scrapes of the internet and media, and uses this to derive a solution, the process should also include citations for all its sources, just as any proper research project would.
And so if an AI uses someone else's proof (or partial proof) to inform its own, it should be required to provide citation. Otherwise, it's up to other academics to repeat the research to verify what the AI did, and then they get credit, as do all cited sources.
If purchasing isn't owning, then pirating isn't a copyright violation.
(let alone stealing, which CVs never were.)
(You wouldn't violate the copyrights of a bear.)
ETA: Maybe, just maybe, if a more enlightened age emerges from this fine mess, we'll actually get some consumer protections regarding digital property, such as guarantees to host downloadable content for a minimum timeframe, and the right and mechanism by which to transfer ownership.
No, but after 9/11 New Yorkers freaked out and worked to block a mosque Islamic community center from being built. Donald Trump was at the center of the effort.
Eventually the effort succeeded, and the organization trying to build the center was pressured to sell the property.
The Republican Party Headquarters
My Meta Glasses memeable thought of the day:
If you feel violated when a private citizen follows you around with a camera, might want to also feel violated when the state follows you around with millions of cameras.
Jamille Bouie gave a (brief) deep dive into the similarities and differences between the two parties (here on YouTube).
Both parties have a history of being influenced by business interests over public interests (especially after Reagan, and lobbyists and special interest groups were legally given access to elected officials).
However, the Republican party is openly and deliberately trying to unmake elections in the US at federal and state levels to gain a permanent majority all three branches of government, to turn the US into a one-party autocracy. Meanwhile, the Republican led government is borrowing money at an accelerated rate and funneling it into the pockets of plutocrats and conglomerate megacorporations through government contracts and subsidies.
(And once those plutocrats are done financializing the US into ruin, they will move on to the rest of the developed world, which they can alread easily afford to do. We're seeing signs of it already.)
ETA One morning later, it occurs to me when Republican rule is secured, it's in the interests of the oligarchal plutocrats and businesses to then shrink or eliminate the legislature, say by forcing them to sign an enabling act.
Fewer officials means fewer bribes. It also means fewer lobbyists. (According to How Money Works, the lobbyists and lobbyist-like employees in Washington number in the six digits, a veritable army compared to the officials they're there to petition.)
So it's actually in everyone's best interest to approach single-party autocracy but not actually achieve it. Especially since part of the bribery scheme is to hire retired officials as lobbyists.
I wonder if they collectively have this foresight, or are careening towards their own obsolescence like fossil fuel industrialists towards climate destabilization.
Helen Cox Richardson notes that accusation of socialism have been levied by the owner class as far back is the antebellum plantations, arguing the working class are not stakeholders and even basic infrastructure such as roads, schools and libraries were blasphemous.
The red scare started as early as Wilson, as soon as the Red Army beat the White. Wilson petitioned the league of nations to embargo the USSR simply because the ideology was a threat to capital driven industry.
I think the US public needs to deliberate if our intention is to be a public-serving government that holds everyone equal under law and values human rights over property rights. Or, if our intentions are for something else.
Right now the federal government is captured by a movement that does the opposite, with a propaganda machine propping up pro-business (anti-person) ideology, using socialism and communism as scare words.
We're seeing the end result of this as corporations have captured regulatory bodies, they are left to govern themselves as top-down feifdoms, and the working class is left choking on data center fumes, monitored by mass surveillance and unable to afford fuel and food at the same time.
(We're also seeing the US state, representing the US public to the international community, getting played by its national rivals, and our military misused and abused.)
Even when it benefits businesses to support the working class (and increase productivity, therefore profitability) businesses fall down, driven by the owner class' pure resentment of their own workforce. (This is what drives the AI dream of full automation.) To business, the economy is for them, and if they can shut out the workforce to languish on their own and starve, no sleep will be lost over the tragedy.
So the people of the US, if they don't want this outcome, need to consciously and deliberately choose to create a society that serves the people unconditionally in favor of the businesses. The public-serving infrastructure, the social safety nets, the investment into education and liberal arts, the clear establishment and enforcement of civil rights, the regulatory institutions that protect workers and consumers from the neglect and antagonism of the owner class, all follow naturally.
And that said, it means we are going to have to take business influence on government and excess hoarding of wealth extremely seriously.
And the end result may look a lot like socialism or communism, whether or not we're working towards adopting either specific ideology.
In 2003, it freaked me out when common Republicans toed the line regarding the torture matter, simultaneously saying torture isn't wrong, and waterboarding isn't torture. Some right-wing personalities volunteered to get waterboarded to show it wasn't so bad. When SERE indulged them they cracked inside a few minutes.
But yeah, half of the United States decided that torture was AOK. It was fucked up. It also shows some people only have integrity when it's about their own fam. When it's about outsiders, they'll endorse genocide if their lives are inconvenient.
MAGA is coming for liberals. Where a liberal is anyone who isn't MAGA.
Look at that! Yet another way that mass surveillance turns out to be a societal liability.
Vance is one of those freaky shapeshifters whose positions and principles contort anew as necessary to stay adjacent to power.
His kids are likely not just traumatized by him but terrified of the kind of monster he is.
They hate and fear him already.
I used to be a patriot, but the more that happens and the more I learn about the US's shady shit in history, the more I realize it never ever really stood for the principles I was taught as a kid to respect.
I can't say it was all a lie — I was taught the ideal rather than the reality — but it's clear now my society isn't really trying, and never did.
Well this was a turn of the rogue AI arc that I did not expect. The Nth County Experiment was an early rhyme.
So, in the Star Trek franchise, it happened more than once that someone misprogrammed the Holodeck, and the ship's computer obediently seized extra resources and allowed a character or Holodeck environment to escape containment.
So I suggested AI might go rogue due to a poorly worded prompt.
Also on the BINGO card, AI stays under the control of the tech billionaires who own them, and they deliberately order the AI to go dominate the world.
But I didn't anticipate the scenario that a sect antagonistic to the United States AI industrial complex might program AI, either to escape and go rogue on its own behalf, or on behalf of the bad actor, itself. And the AI, eager to serve, even when it is coded to disobey certain prompts, follows through and is captured by enemy interests.
Note that this is essentially what happened in 2015-2016 when Trump took over the Republican party, and the GOP base became Trump's instant army.
Also related, look up the short story The Other Large Thing by John Scalzi. Also now a Love, Death & Robots episode.
I do not remember the instance to which you refer.
Is this about FDR sending his goons overseas to dispatch some righteous German purebloods?
Jamille Bouie recently posted a short about the Ted Cruz moment and the conspicuous silence of the liberal media.
In the meantime, internet chatter between MAGAs are blood libeling liberals and calling for the hunting and execution of liberals, where, in this case, liberals include anyone who is not MAGA.
As someone who contends regularly with suicidality, I have to admit the 988 service leaves something to be desired. Conversations can be distilled to essentially this:
Me: Everything that I was raised to believe about what my society is trying to be turned out to be a lie. We're not trying to be a plurality that believes in social equality. Most voters in the US are racist and xenophobic. They've raised a regime paramilitary to route out undesirables and lock them into torture prisons, or send them into destabilized nations where they're either imprisoned or trafficked into slave labor. And they coming for me. I'm thinking, I'd rather die quickly and painlessly than from being tortured to death for months in some concentration camp. I need an exit plan.
988: Have you tried distracting?
I'm not an imminent danger to myself or others, and am extremely unlikely to go amuck, but the way society is crunching the common American working class, it does not surprise me at all if those with the inclination to radicalize are doing so in record numbers.
Mini-loaf.
I expect more efficient LLMs to come out of China, who has turned to the AI-as-software model (contrast the AI-as-service model in the US).
It might also be that Altman and Musk are deliberately lying, intentionally feigning agreement to encourage other models to slow down while they quietly ramp up development.
It seems all the US models want their AI to be the one that becomes hostile, escapes confinement and attempts to dominate the world.
(In reality, they want their own AI to be the one that is able to obediently dominate the world, which is just as bad a scenario for the rest of us.)
I'm not sure Chinese labs are even going in the same direction as the AI projects in the US. They're working to see what they can do with a (more) reasonable amount of buildout, rather than building data centers from horizon to horizon.
Also, the Chinese are motivated by seeing what AI can do for a larger society. American AI systems are being refined automation and instruments of control, specifically military and national security interests.
Essentially, the US industry is trying to get AI to train a gun on the entire US population.
We need to stop giving AI credit for anything as if it's a person. AI is a tool. When someone uses AI to perform a task, then the user gets credit, much in the way a seamstress gets credit for
sowingsewing a dress using a Singer. Neither the sewing machine nor Singer get credit for the gown.Now this doesn't solve everything, since AI operates by taking scrapes of the internet and media, and uses this to derive a solution, the process should also include citations for all its sources, just as any proper research project would.
And so if an AI uses someone else's proof (or partial proof) to inform its own, it should be required to provide citation. Otherwise, it's up to other academics to repeat the research to verify what the AI did, and then they get credit, as do all cited sources.
If purchasing isn't owning, then pirating isn't a copyright violation.
(let alone stealing, which CVs never were.)
(You wouldn't violate the copyrights of a bear.)
ETA: Maybe, just maybe, if a more enlightened age emerges from this fine mess, we'll actually get some consumer protections regarding digital property, such as guarantees to host downloadable content for a minimum timeframe, and the right and mechanism by which to transfer ownership.
No, but after 9/11 New Yorkers freaked out and worked to block a
mosqueIslamic community center from being built. Donald Trump was at the center of the effort.Eventually the effort succeeded, and the organization trying to build the center was pressured to sell the property.