Peanutbjelly

@Peanutbjelly@sopuli.xyz

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Hee Hee Ho Ho Ha Ha⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  “look the guy who spends all day every day saying things said a cringe thing once! stop listening to him about israel and billionaires!”

  there’s a huge hasan smear campaign by corpo “democrats” right now, because obviously he’s the real danger for some reason and not the cheeto rapist in power.

  when people are calling democrats controlled opposition, this is what they mean.

  remember hasan’s dog? don’t think about the entrenched democrats actively enabling the fascist takeover. don’t think about their support for funding israel’s genocide of gaza. what if his dog possibly potentially had a shock collar because the way it moved once! keep hasan on the defensive so he isn’t talking about israel or billionaires!

  etc.

  i definitely am not the biggest hasan fan, but i find myself defending him regularly from absolute bullshit.

  if there’s was ever a time to be picky about hasan’s choice of emotionally biased statements on non-issues, this is really not it.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨type shit⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  " gets so much traction with dudes acting like its a mayor cultural abuse of men while scarcely connecting to other genital mutilation happening to women"

  FGM is already illegal in the states, otherwise i’m sure the constant comparison would matter more. also why are we making zero sum games for progressives when making a progressive safe environment would give more rights to everyone?

  this is one of the frustrating points of contention that managed to get atheists and feminists fighting each-other rather than fighting groups like the heritage foundation well over a decade ago. i legitimately believe a lot of people pushing the need to suggest that somehow people are pretending FGM is being dismissed whenever addressing MGM are just bots/instigators trying to get people fighting. that is stupid. nobody is arguing this. why are we making this divisive bullshit salient and real?

  “all genital mutilation is bad. it’s fucked up that it’s still legal in any capacity.” =/= “we hate women.”

  even almost twenty years ago, saying “this is stupid, we should be supporting each-other progressively in rights and freedoms against thing like religious mutilation of baby genitals, and stopping religiously empowered political groups from dominating the discourse,” earned an inbox full of mutilated penis imagery, because somehow feminism is supposed to somehow be incompatible with a world where male babies don’t get their genitals mutilated to show that it’s just “not as bad” or something. ignore the kids who die from infection or w/e.

  this was successfully made into the dominant social response in any context.

  then we saw a couple decades of atheists and feminists being too distracted defending against incel/SJW branding to do anything about the fascist takeover, and progressives, dejected, vacated spaces allowing whole new incel chud armies to breed and take over. you’d think some would see this as a backfiring, but “it proves our point” so we won’t think about that.

  i just wish i would stop seeing the same completely unnecessary divisive arguments that have helped groups like the heritage foundation get into power to remove rights for EVERYONE.

  helping men =/= helping the patriarchy.

  luckily, it looks like this thread is full of non-divisive conversation on the subject. this makes me happier.

  heritage foundation types are destroying the world, we need solidarity and action focused at the problem, rather than anger at trans people wanting basic human rights, or at atheists/activists for wanting to remove classic religious patriarchal baby genital cutting traditions, because being against that makes you the patriarchy somehow. etc.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Me, an intellectual⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Not going to deny that some people totally do just use their trivia knowledge to try and peacock for social dominance, but I don’t think those people are ever actually intellectuals, due to the nature and reasoning behind their behaviour.

  I do see a lot of people who interpret passing on knowledge as some kind of ego play, when it’s literally just that you would think they also would appreciate not doing something stupid just because ego shouldn’t be offended by the very concept of learning. Or worse, when the evidence suggests something that is against the social grain, and basically a guarantee to get you lynched for even trying, usual with a collective pretense of op’s reasoning. Because it can never just be about collective learning as a culture that benefits our species and protects us from the ongoing global shit fire.

  Although more people need to understand it as predictive models and specific epistemic observer positions/eco-niche familiarity where you can run into that whole Dunning Kruger problem and/or poor precision weighting on the robustness of your current set of Bayesian predictors. Usually being interpreted entirely through vibes and social agreement these days. There are some really fun papers around how much social opinion can hack your opinion of you don’t learn to grow and favor more robust sources of information.

  Like people who are super confident that their carnivorous pet would be healthier as a vegan, because they have “veggies are healthy” overweighted and over-generalized, and they see your confidence in the vet’s more robust understanding of the situation as some kind of ego power play, because why would people fit their knowledge for actually understanding the world rather than overspecializing into the monkey hierarchy dominance ques.

  I could give a lot more examples, and how cults and the like are really good at hacking these same failures of robustness to intentionally fuck up precision weighting to ensure the world model stays fucked up and hackable for their authoritative source. Or the wombo combo that leads to the USA HHS promoting Andrew Wakefield, as If it isn’t the most thoroughly and robustly rebuked set of lies that ever got momentarily snuck into a science journal.

  But remember, the intellectuals are cringe and their attempts to help the public become more informed are just too annoying, because updating your misinformed world view takes energy, and this anti intellectual culture totally has no affect on the current fucked up global situation. Also politics are cringe too. Any kind of caring is cringe, and we need to dunk on it to maintain our monkey hierarchy luster. Easy to socialize against these terrible energy consuming intellectuals and their weird philosophical eco-niche. /s

  This really is the most stupid timeline. I half expect to get banned for not just doing the social thing and going "yeah ha ha, fuck the stupid pompous intellectual for making me feel stupid for encouraging me to update my priors or precision weighting when it might be important.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Anon gets philosophical⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Almost like you need to take different empirical observations from varied tools and perspectives to get more reliable predictions about the wider body. Enough robustness gives you confident weightings that can be used to grow more empirical evidence to build new cognitive tools. No map is the territory, so robustness and weighting need to be an active process in changing growing areas of understanding. no new tools are possible without philosophy actively constructing along science using wider Bayesian basins than some single scientific data point. those varied but well-weighted Bayesian networks are not “just philosophy” like joe rogan giving a very shallow, non-robust, greentext level take on something that sounded mildly plausible.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨you're doing ReSeArCh rong!!⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  As someone aware of decades of legal battles to prevent the gutting of education systems, usually noticeable around local levels, you almost always end up at corpo think tanks like the heritage foundation.

  If you’re familiar with the heritage foundation, they’ve been trying to run a project2025 style playbook for decades, and it is only through their success that current administration is a billionaire playground. Reminder that elon musk could directly choose for hundreds of thousands of children to die this year by taking aware their food and medicine, because he wanted to. Also billionaires got an unimaginably generous treatment at the same time, worth much more than all of the food and medicine.

  It’s more an amalgam of cooperatively evil assholes, most of which have an absurd amount of money for some reason, but yeah, billionaires are a good chunk of why there are whole groups being funded to spend all day every day trying to kneecap educational efforts, or painting academics as evil satanists who are corrupting your children with science.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Y tho⁩ ⁨⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Just gotta pull yourself up by your bootstraps and figure out out like i did.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨🐇 🐇 🐇⁩ ⁨⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Bayesian analysis of complex intelligent systems via friston’s free energy principle and active inference? Or machine learning?

  Personally love the stuff circling Michael Levin at tufts university. I could also imagine there’s a lot of unique model building in different biological/ecological niches.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Microsoft CEO Admits That AI Is Generating Basically No Value⁩ ⁨⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  i think it’s a framing issue, and AI development is catching a lot of flak for the general failures of our current socio-economic hierarchy. also people having been shouting “super intelligence or bust” for decades now. i just keep watching it get better much more quickly than most people’s estimates, and understand the implications of it. i do appreciate discouraging idiot business people from shunting AI into everything that doesn’t need it, because buzzword or they can use it to exploit something. some likely just used it as an excuse to fire people, but again, that’s not actually the AI’s fault. that is this shitty system. i guess my issue is people keep framing this as “AI bad” instead of “corpos bad”

  if the loom was never invented, we would still live in an oppressive society sliding towards fascism. people tend to miss the forest for the trees when looking at tech tools politically. also people are blind to the environment, which is often more important than the thing itself. and the loom is still useful.

  compression and polysemy growing your dimensions of understanding in a high dimensional environment, which is also changing shape, comprehension growing with the erasure of your blindspots. collective intelligence (and how diversity helps cover more blindspots) predictive processing (and how we should embrace lack of confidence, but understand the strength of proper weighting for predictions, even when a single blindspot can shift the entire landscape, making no framework flawless or perfectly reliable.) and understanding how everything we know is just the best map of the territory we’ve figured out so far. if you want to know judge how subtle but in our face blindspots can be, look up how to test your literal blindspot, you just need 30 seconds a paper with two small dots to see how blind we are to our blindspots. etc.

  more than fighting the new tools we can use, we need to claim them, and the rest of the world, away from those who ensure that all tools will only exist to exploit us.

  am i shouting to the void? wasting the breath of my digits? will humanity ever learn to stop acting like dumb angry monkeys?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Microsoft CEO Admits That AI Is Generating Basically No Value⁩ ⁨⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  let’s make another article completely misrepresenting opinions/trajectories and the general state of things, because we know it’ll sell and it will get the ignorant fighting with those who actually have an idea of what’s going on, because they saw in an article that AI was eating the pets.

  please seek media sources that actually seek to inform rather than provoke or instigate confusion or division through misrepresentation and disinformation.

  these days you can’t even try to fix a category error introduced by the media without getting cussed out and blocked from congregate sites because you ‘support the evil thing’ that the article said was evil, and everyone in the group hates, without even an attempt to understand the context, or what part of the thing is even being discussed.

  also, can we talk more about breaking up the big companies so they don’t have a hold on the technology, rather than getting mad at everyone who interacts with modern technology?

  legit ss bad feels like fighting rightwing misinformation about migrant workers and trans people.

  just make people mad, and teach them that communication is a waste of energy.
  we need to learn how to tell who is informing rather than obfuscating, through historicity of accuracy, and consensus with other experts from diverse perspectives. not building tribes upon who agrees with us. and don’t blame experts for not also learning how to apply a novel and virtually impossible level of compression when explaining their complex expertise, when you don’t even want to learn a word or concept. it’s like being asked to describe how cameras work, and then getting called an idiot when some analogy used can be imagined in a less useful context that doesn’t apply 1:1 with the complex subject being summarized.

  outside of that, find better sources of information. fuck this communication disabling ragebait.

  cause now just having a history of rebuking this garbage gets you dismissed, because a history of interacting with the topic on this platform is a good enough vibe check to just not attempt understanding and interaction.

  TLDR: the quality of the articles and conversation on this subject are so generally ill-informed that it hurts, and obviously trying to craft environments of angry engagement rather than informing.

  also i wonder if anyone will actually engage with this topic rather than get angry, cuss me out, and not hear a single thing being communicated.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Nick Clegg says asking artists for use permission would ‘kill’ the AI industry⁩ ⁨⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Or maybe the solution is in dissolving the socio-economic class hierarchy, which can only exist as an epistemic paperclip maximizer. Rather than also kneecapping useful technology.

  I feel much of the critique and repulsion comes from people without much knowledge of either art/art history, or AI. Nor even the problems and history of socio-economic policies.

  Monkeys just want to be angry and throw poop at the things they don’t understand. No conversation, no nuance, and no understanding of how such behaviours roll out the red carpet for continued ‘elite’ abuses that shape our every aspect of life.

  The revulsion is justified, but misdirected. Stop blaming technology for the problems of the system, and start going after the system that is the problem.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨ChatGPT is shifting rightwards politically⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  That argument was to be had with Apple twenty years ago as they built their walled garden, which intentionally frustrates people into going all in apple. Still can’t get anyone to care about dark patters/deceptive design, or disney attacking the creative Commons which it parasitically grew or of. AI isn’t and has never been the real issue. It’s just absorbs all the hate the corpos should be getting as they use it, along with every other tool at their disposal, to slowly fuck us into subservience. Honestly, AI is teaching us the importance of diverse perspectives in intelligent systems, and the dangers of overfitting, which exist in our own brains and social/economic systems.

  Same issue, different social ecosystem being hoarded by the wealthy.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Facial Recognition That Tracks Suspicious Friendliness Is Coming to a Store Near You⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Big. Fan of ai stuff. Not a fan of this. This definitely won’t have issues with minority and disability falling outside of distribution and causing false positives that enable more harassment of people who already get unfairly harassed.

  Let this die with the mind reading tactics they spawned from.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨IMF predicts AI will impact 40% of jobs worldwide, exacerbating inequality and social tensions⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨years⁩ ago⁩:

  The main issue though is the economic system, not the technology.

  My hope is that it shakes things up fast enough that they can’t boil the frog, and something actually changes.

  Having capable AI is a more blatantly valid excuse to demand a change in economic balance and redistribution. The only alternative would be destroy all technology and return to monkey. Id rather we just fix the system so that technological advancements don’t seem negative because the wealthy have already hoarded all new gains of every new technology for this past handful of decades.

  Such power is discretely weaponized through propaganda, influencing, and economic reorganizing to ensure the equilibrium stays until the world is burned to ash, in sacrifice to the lifestyle of the confidently selfish.

  I mean, we could have just rejected the loom. I don’t think we’d actually be better off, but I believe some of the technological gain should have been less hoardable by existing elite. Almost like they used wealth to prevent any gains from slipping away to the poor. Fixing the issue before it was this bad was the proper answer. Now people don’t even want to consider that option, or say it’s too difficult so we should just destroy the loom.

  There is a markov blanket around the perpetuating lifestyle of modern aristocrats, obviously capable of surviving every perturbation. every gain as a society has made that reality more true entirely due to the direction of where new power is distributed. People are afraid of AI turning into a paperclip maximizer, but that’s already what happened to our abstracted social reality. Maximums being maximized and minimums being minimized in the complex chaotic system of billions of people leads to inevitable increase to accumulation of power and wealth wherever it has already been gathered. Unless we can dissolve the political and social barrier maintaining this trend, it we will be stuck with our suffering regardless of whether we develop new technology or don’t.

  Although doesn’t really matter where you are or what system you’re in right now. Odds are there is a set of rich asshole’s working as hard as possible to see you are kept from any piece of the pie that would destabilize the status quo.

  I’m hoping AI is drastic enough that the actual problem isn’t ignored.