Well, it's here to stay. I don't use it, but if I want to discuss things going forward that doesn't matter, the fact is millions do, many to very engrossed degrees, and the inertia alone is cement for the scenario.
In a dream scenario, this would be fine, good even. We have the masses, especially the type who are easily influenced, all nice and corralled. In the hands of more competent and benevolent minds, this is great. It's sort of like how we'd want to heap lavish taxes on an ideal government, who would use every dollar optimally.
In practice, we have a large chunk of humanity vulnerable to the whims of those holding the reins. We worry about Google and Apple Disney and Do No Evil and what they do with their massive power, but the facetweets are the hamster water bottle that everyone sips at. Voluntarily. Faithfully. You could put anything in that water, you can steer people down to their deepest beliefs.
It's like Inception - diluted, of course, but no need to dream dive.
The question was whether we will be able to use it, TRUEAI or not, to control the unwashed proles.
Given that various countries are already attempting various retarded maneuvers with their networks, already seek to control and compel-by-force, the answer is "You bet your ass we will."
Establish that. There's a century of Disney movies and saturday morning cartoons that still haven't reached consensus at what "being human" means.
You might as well say "computers aren't better at Love".
This is the same reason we have pundits discussing what a driverless car does when "choosing" a human to die. Computers don't know "die", or "risk", or any mental constructs. You get it all the time with the PB&J project, people think "then spread jelly" is an instruction, but a computer has no idea what the fuck "spread" means, or what a "knife" is.
Computers don't suffer from the trolley problem, they have an "abnormal road condition" or "obstacle condition" (ie human ahead) and a routine to attempt. If it turns out the conditions become numerous, it just continues down the reaction tree. Mostly towards endpoints of "stop and demand manual control"
Anyway we have no singular definition of Love, nor Being Human, and your premise of a premise flaw is flawed.
Won't happen. Waste of opportunity. I may not have a degree in economics, but without a cultural/social effect, there's simply no way money will be left on the table. The most direct scenario being porque_no_los_dos?.gif
It's parasitic and hidden, but to believe that an opt-in checkbox equates to being "in the clear" - hell, that op-tin being offered at all is supposed to be par for today's commercial atmosphere - is awfully naive.
In fact, this "hidden" behavior? Is still transparent relative to the shit being done with various fingerprints/useragents, with the hundred different metrics possible on your phone. To say nothing of you unfortunate souls with accounts on facetweet and socnets.
It's almost refreshingly simple. They're mooching your CPU, your electricity, but the intent is plain, the motives obvious. Compare it to the clusterfuck, the rat-king of trade-and-parcel done with your credit info/score/history/etc. We're oblivious to the amount of closed-door behavior going on around us, of how many databases end up hooking a single instance of you flashing your insurance card to get a painkiller or flu shot, or a scratch on the car.
Again, it's unscrupulous, yes, but "shady"? Consider that word and apply it to the shady pickpocket who grabs your $20's and throws your wallet on the sidewalk, versus the shady cartels running our world, ISPs and Muh Big Pharma and all our good friends trashing the atmosphere/soil/rainforest/aquabeds/whatever without a moment's hesitation, global-scale behaviors behind purchased laws, behind NDAs, behind agreement named with so much obfuscating euphemism you think it benefits consumer proles. Go ask a stranger what "net neutrality" is.
Christ, you can probably stop these scripts with a browser mod or two, or a greasemonkey. Five minutes of placement. While if you fuck with your registry and hosts file maybe you'll get (most of) win10's bullshit to stop showing up on wireshark.
I'd probably prefer a silent miner (esp. if throttled to polite levels) over the butterfly dominoes from an ad watched by DoubleClick, with a facebook pixel watching. Submission is stupid about what he can hope for, naive, thinks an ad is just "Buy my book" and done. Thinks clicking "don't send me emails" is a win.
There's the hitch: Useful skills worth paying for.
We measure employees by how "valuable" they are. This is literally a dollar number. The only reason an employee exists is their absence is more expensive. Said another way, the only reason an employee is because the existence of that position makes me money.
Thus, the only measure of a human is "how much money can s/he make me?"
The Point holds true for cost aversion, how much you save. It's semantics, it's trivial. The above is our definition of a "useful" human. This is what a human of worth is. Someone who makes you money.
Humans with functional limbs and muscles and eyeballs currently have a positive "worth" in this conversation. Those ingredients can be used to make me money, I will hire someone with those ingredients. I have a need that is filled by those ingredients. I will pay you, but it ultimately concentrates wealth up into me.
Soon, those ingredients will not have worth. And no one is paying money for whatever the fuck "wisdom" is. Humans have MANY skills and wisdoms, but few of them matter in the arena of "make me money".
I'm not optimistic enough to see a UBI get any traction. We'll just keep ratcheting up the existing welfare systems. The awkward, clunky systems we have now. Subsidies on the bare necessities proles need to survive. We'll feed you soy and dress you in jumpsuits and shelter you in Terrafoam. We'll continue to run those industries. They won't be afloat because our broke asses can afford it - they would immediately go under, despite being robot-run. They'll be afloat because they're subsidized into existence. Everything else will be an insane Alice in Wonderland economy.
I remember reading that knowledge X is measured at like 50,000 times as much as knowledge Y, as valued on the market-of-marketing.
X was knowledge that a woman is pregnant Y was knowing a person's name-address-phone-birthday-etc (cumulatively, I think)
A pregnant women (preferably first baby) is about to pick several products, many of them (diapers, food) "monetization streams". That shit is a golden goose, she is about to Make It Rain and every marketfuck wants to be there hopping up and down and screeching to be picked.
Holy shit. The ego on these guys. The fucking ego.
YOU showed up to the party. Uninvited.
This is NOT your fucking party. This is not your house. And it logically follows the party will go on without you, because your implied dependency is bullshit.
You are unneeded. You. Are. Not. Needed. Stop pretending otherwise.
There are more appropriate apple articles to take your "mine works fine".
If you can jump across time, you can put it among the other 9000 identical posts in the past. It will be pointless to do so in a different timeline, but it's equally pointless here anyway.
It's on by default, not just for the "market" but for users too, because we need to be able to see emojis and an image macro of a "minion" who doesn't like Mondays.
LessthansymbolSarcasmclosetagGreaterthansymbol
Exceptions don't make the rule, rendering email should be a toggle for the cases you need it. If any. An "always on" opt-in would be fine, user-elected consequences. If you're scared of people asking where the emoji are, just have one of those "Media content detected, may not render in safety-mode, click here to change?" or whatever float above.
>it doesn't have to be super fast >the cost estimates for the picker were around $25k
This is the dam holding the lake. 25k is probably dramatized, the upfronts are still significant, esp when you include the disruption that comes with large changes, deployment. It's pretty much the only hesitation.
And if we could authoritatively say "this is as good as it gets" they'd have already signed huge contracts. The per-hour rate is obscenely delicious, even for "slow" models, as you estimate. Paying humans means overhead and unpredictability, throw them out and your metrics and dexterity will be like obedient clay. Like a TV weatherman who owns an almanac from the future.
The hesitation is probably for scaling up incrementally because hey, next year's model is better, don't go early-adopting a whole factory. Let's just do trialing and experimenting, but not out of doubt, only to make the Big Plunge(s) more efficient.
There is no such doubt. There is no question; labor is a dead man walking. We're just going through the motions. Capitalism is a self-optimizing machine, it can't help but enter the new era intelligently, tactically, hedging and exploring and refining. The era is here, though. Prolekistan's only export is on borrowed time.
What happens to countries with no export is left as an exercise for the reader.
I'm thinking this is less about mood and more about the idea that inspiration = distraction.
When you're trying to solve a problem - no, not the "motions" of making shit reference each other in your everyday code - but solve a fucking problem like mentally predicting constellation movements across various time lengths, you don't want light bulbs, you just want to chew very hard in a narrow way and nowhere else.
When you DO want light bulbs (that can include code (design in particular, picking your maneuvers)) then yeah, sure, music ("happy" probably working a bit more) introduces variation (didn't want to say "noise) that will encourage wider thinking. It jiggles the handle, it vibrates the lock's tumblers, it gives dinosaurs feathers. But not dramatically as that; it's supplementary and subtle and you don't NEED it to think outside your usual box if you deliberately and consciously think outside your typical patterns.
The two types of thinking (and what gives them these tiny buffs) might compare somewhat to CPU and RAM.
Centralizing means a lynchpin. Point sources are meant to be supplementary options, DDLs being "convenient" and all. Just don't build a jenga tower atop a Single Point Of Ultimate Failure.
Decentralization is good practice even outside teh leetwarez distro. Though not viable for all scenarios.
> If you don't have workers that get paid, you don't have consumers that buy your stuff What this does not [permanently] result in: Cheaper stuff What this does result in: The stuff scaled down, layoffs, shutdowns, and finally, the stuff is simply unmanufactured. If the market of people buying bluetooth fidget spinners shrinks, they just don't get made. Low "volume" is only a measure of sales, not interest, so the same applies to, say, cotton t-shirts.
"consumers aren't buying* the stuff" means no one bothers making it. *this is equivalent to the "can't" you speak of, in a market
What I anticipate: In order for SOMEONE to continue giving a fuck about the negative margin on the non-luxury food, clothing, etc of plebs it will be subsidized to the tiniest sliver of black. This will be a ratcheting, frog-boiling process, not a sudden one. It's BEEN happening.
So we can look forward to finishing the race to the bottom. A few city-sized factories* producing soy cubes and jumpsuits with millions of robots, the perfected image of efficiency, the beautiful Final Form - which STILL comes out red and they wouldn't bother, except we subsidize in a derpy circle of full retard the Ouroboros would envy.
*At this point it really won't matter whose, private or state-owned, the distinction will make no difference.
The rest of the "economy" will be the three remaining supercorporations who haven't managed to absorb each other, probably skirmishing, trying to pull legislative rugs, sabotage each other, not out of active desire but simply the passive, natural order of capitalism. Optimization drives itself, evolution Just Happens. Try not to interpret them as having "employees", of course, their roster is anyone who can prove they belong to the noble family that owns AlphabetMicrosoftAmazonApple, or DisneyTimeWarnerComcastVerizon.
And we're, what, murdering them back? Don't hyperbole the response. If it bothers you that innocents are reaching for their lawyers at the first "Could we ask you a few..." then figure out why that reaction came to be.
Also: You don't want to squirm over civilian scrutiny either, that means "you have something to hide" remember?
They're not interested in waiters who leave people with empty drinks.
They're interested in grilling waiters who don't upsell enough alcohol.
Even if it's a guy/gal who has a natural talent for attracting clientele and had increased your business - or any other number of useful traits, which don't show up on a spreadsheet and therefore s/he's going to be "reviewed" onto the chopping block.
Metrics are usually genuine; the conclusions attached to them are usually voodoo.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, it's here to stay. I don't use it, but if I want to discuss things going forward that doesn't matter, the fact is millions do, many to very engrossed degrees, and the inertia alone is cement for the scenario.
In a dream scenario, this would be fine, good even. We have the masses, especially the type who are easily influenced, all nice and corralled. In the hands of more competent and benevolent minds, this is great. It's sort of like how we'd want to heap lavish taxes on an ideal government, who would use every dollar optimally.
In practice, we have a large chunk of humanity vulnerable to the whims of those holding the reins. We worry about Google and Apple Disney and Do No Evil and what they do with their massive power, but the facetweets are the hamster water bottle that everyone sips at. Voluntarily. Faithfully. You could put anything in that water, you can steer people down to their deepest beliefs.
It's like Inception - diluted, of course, but no need to dream dive.
> it's not true-scotsman intelligent
The question was whether we will be able to use it, TRUEAI or not, to control the unwashed proles.
Given that various countries are already attempting various retarded maneuvers with their networks, already seek to control and compel-by-force, the answer is "You bet your ass we will."
Establish that. There's a century of Disney movies and saturday morning cartoons that still haven't reached consensus at what "being human" means.
You might as well say "computers aren't better at Love".
This is the same reason we have pundits discussing what a driverless car does when "choosing" a human to die. Computers don't know "die", or "risk", or any mental constructs. You get it all the time with the PB&J project, people think "then spread jelly" is an instruction, but a computer has no idea what the fuck "spread" means, or what a "knife" is.
Computers don't suffer from the trolley problem, they have an "abnormal road condition" or "obstacle condition" (ie human ahead) and a routine to attempt. If it turns out the conditions become numerous, it just continues down the reaction tree. Mostly towards endpoints of "stop and demand manual control"
Anyway we have no singular definition of Love, nor Being Human, and your premise of a premise flaw is flawed.
Won't happen. Waste of opportunity. I may not have a degree in economics, but without a cultural/social effect, there's simply no way money will be left on the table. The most direct scenario being porque_no_los_dos?.gif
Speech controls are so 2016.
Now if you want to quit a program or change browser tab, you make a facial expression into the camera.
It's parasitic and hidden, but to believe that an opt-in checkbox equates to being "in the clear" - hell, that op-tin being offered at all is supposed to be par for today's commercial atmosphere - is awfully naive.
In fact, this "hidden" behavior? Is still transparent relative to the shit being done with various fingerprints/useragents, with the hundred different metrics possible on your phone. To say nothing of you unfortunate souls with accounts on facetweet and socnets.
It's almost refreshingly simple. They're mooching your CPU, your electricity, but the intent is plain, the motives obvious. Compare it to the clusterfuck, the rat-king of trade-and-parcel done with your credit info/score/history/etc. We're oblivious to the amount of closed-door behavior going on around us, of how many databases end up hooking a single instance of you flashing your insurance card to get a painkiller or flu shot, or a scratch on the car.
Again, it's unscrupulous, yes, but "shady"? Consider that word and apply it to the shady pickpocket who grabs your $20's and throws your wallet on the sidewalk, versus the shady cartels running our world, ISPs and Muh Big Pharma and all our good friends trashing the atmosphere/soil/rainforest/aquabeds/whatever without a moment's hesitation, global-scale behaviors behind purchased laws, behind NDAs, behind agreement named with so much obfuscating euphemism you think it benefits consumer proles. Go ask a stranger what "net neutrality" is.
Christ, you can probably stop these scripts with a browser mod or two, or a greasemonkey. Five minutes of placement. While if you fuck with your registry and hosts file maybe you'll get (most of) win10's bullshit to stop showing up on wireshark.
I'd probably prefer a silent miner (esp. if throttled to polite levels) over the butterfly dominoes from an ad watched by DoubleClick, with a facebook pixel watching. Submission is stupid about what he can hope for, naive, thinks an ad is just "Buy my book" and done. Thinks clicking "don't send me emails" is a win.
Not an apologist, just mentioning perspective.
There's the hitch: Useful skills worth paying for.
We measure employees by how "valuable" they are. This is literally a dollar number. The only reason an employee exists is their absence is more expensive. Said another way, the only reason an employee is because the existence of that position makes me money.
Thus, the only measure of a human is "how much money can s/he make me?"
The Point holds true for cost aversion, how much you save. It's semantics, it's trivial. The above is our definition of a "useful" human. This is what a human of worth is. Someone who makes you money.
Humans with functional limbs and muscles and eyeballs currently have a positive "worth" in this conversation. Those ingredients can be used to make me money, I will hire someone with those ingredients. I have a need that is filled by those ingredients. I will pay you, but it ultimately concentrates wealth up into me.
Soon, those ingredients will not have worth. And no one is paying money for whatever the fuck "wisdom" is. Humans have MANY skills and wisdoms, but few of them matter in the arena of "make me money".
I'm not optimistic enough to see a UBI get any traction. We'll just keep ratcheting up the existing welfare systems. The awkward, clunky systems we have now. Subsidies on the bare necessities proles need to survive. We'll feed you soy and dress you in jumpsuits and shelter you in Terrafoam. We'll continue to run those industries. They won't be afloat because our broke asses can afford it - they would immediately go under, despite being robot-run. They'll be afloat because they're subsidized into existence. Everything else will be an insane Alice in Wonderland economy.
Intent is subjective.
Stop trying to micdrop.
I see attempts to whitewash the term so often I just shake my head.
It's not going away.
I remember reading that knowledge X is measured at like 50,000 times as much as knowledge Y, as valued on the market-of-marketing.
X was knowledge that a woman is pregnant
Y was knowing a person's name-address-phone-birthday-etc (cumulatively, I think)
A pregnant women (preferably first baby) is about to pick several products, many of them (diapers, food) "monetization streams". That shit is a golden goose, she is about to Make It Rain and every marketfuck wants to be there hopping up and down and screeching to be picked.
>infrastructure of the modern internet
Holy shit. The ego on these guys. The fucking ego.
YOU showed up to the party. Uninvited.
This is NOT your fucking party. This is not your house. And it logically follows the party will go on without you, because your implied dependency is bullshit.
You are unneeded. You. Are. Not. Needed. Stop pretending otherwise.
There are more appropriate apple articles to take your "mine works fine".
If you can jump across time, you can put it among the other 9000 identical posts in the past. It will be pointless to do so in a different timeline, but it's equally pointless here anyway.
Could you guys keep it down, I can't enjoy Fisherman's Wife III in here.
It's on by default, not just for the "market" but for users too, because we need to be able to see emojis and an image macro of a "minion" who doesn't like Mondays.
LessthansymbolSarcasmclosetagGreaterthansymbol
Exceptions don't make the rule, rendering email should be a toggle for the cases you need it. If any. An "always on" opt-in would be fine, user-elected consequences. If you're scared of people asking where the emoji are, just have one of those "Media content detected, may not render in safety-mode, click here to change?" or whatever float above.
>it doesn't have to be super fast
>the cost estimates for the picker were around $25k
This is the dam holding the lake. 25k is probably dramatized, the upfronts are still significant, esp when you include the disruption that comes with large changes, deployment. It's pretty much the only hesitation.
And if we could authoritatively say "this is as good as it gets" they'd have already signed huge contracts. The per-hour rate is obscenely delicious, even for "slow" models, as you estimate. Paying humans means overhead and unpredictability, throw them out and your metrics and dexterity will be like obedient clay. Like a TV weatherman who owns an almanac from the future.
The hesitation is probably for scaling up incrementally because hey, next year's model is better, don't go early-adopting a whole factory. Let's just do trialing and experimenting, but not out of doubt, only to make the Big Plunge(s) more efficient.
There is no such doubt. There is no question; labor is a dead man walking. We're just going through the motions. Capitalism is a self-optimizing machine, it can't help but enter the new era intelligently, tactically, hedging and exploring and refining. The era is here, though. Prolekistan's only export is on borrowed time.
What happens to countries with no export is left as an exercise for the reader.
I'm thinking this is less about mood and more about the idea that inspiration = distraction.
When you're trying to solve a problem - no, not the "motions" of making shit reference each other in your everyday code - but solve a fucking problem like mentally predicting constellation movements across various time lengths, you don't want light bulbs, you just want to chew very hard in a narrow way and nowhere else.
When you DO want light bulbs (that can include code (design in particular, picking your maneuvers)) then yeah, sure, music ("happy" probably working a bit more) introduces variation (didn't want to say "noise) that will encourage wider thinking. It jiggles the handle, it vibrates the lock's tumblers, it gives dinosaurs feathers. But not dramatically as that; it's supplementary and subtle and you don't NEED it to think outside your usual box if you deliberately and consciously think outside your typical patterns.
The two types of thinking (and what gives them these tiny buffs) might compare somewhat to CPU and RAM.
Bots.
Centralizing means a lynchpin. Point sources are meant to be supplementary options, DDLs being "convenient" and all. Just don't build a jenga tower atop a Single Point Of Ultimate Failure.
Decentralization is good practice even outside teh leetwarez distro. Though not viable for all scenarios.
> If you don't have workers that get paid, you don't have consumers that buy your stuff
What this does not [permanently] result in: Cheaper stuff
What this does result in: The stuff scaled down, layoffs, shutdowns, and finally, the stuff is simply unmanufactured. If the market of people buying bluetooth fidget spinners shrinks, they just don't get made. Low "volume" is only a measure of sales, not interest, so the same applies to, say, cotton t-shirts.
"consumers aren't buying* the stuff" means no one bothers making it.
*this is equivalent to the "can't" you speak of, in a market
What I anticipate: In order for SOMEONE to continue giving a fuck about the negative margin on the non-luxury food, clothing, etc of plebs it will be subsidized to the tiniest sliver of black. This will be a ratcheting, frog-boiling process, not a sudden one. It's BEEN happening.
So we can look forward to finishing the race to the bottom. A few city-sized factories* producing soy cubes and jumpsuits with millions of robots, the perfected image of efficiency, the beautiful Final Form - which STILL comes out red and they wouldn't bother, except we subsidize in a derpy circle of full retard the Ouroboros would envy.
*At this point it really won't matter whose, private or state-owned, the distinction will make no difference.
The rest of the "economy" will be the three remaining supercorporations who haven't managed to absorb each other, probably skirmishing, trying to pull legislative rugs, sabotage each other, not out of active desire but simply the passive, natural order of capitalism. Optimization drives itself, evolution Just Happens. Try not to interpret them as having "employees", of course, their roster is anyone who can prove they belong to the noble family that owns AlphabetMicrosoftAmazonApple, or DisneyTimeWarnerComcastVerizon.
Anyway, see you in the Terrafoam.
And we're, what, murdering them back? Don't hyperbole the response. If it bothers you that innocents are reaching for their lawyers at the first "Could we ask you a few..." then figure out why that reaction came to be.
Also: You don't want to squirm over civilian scrutiny either, that means "you have something to hide" remember?
They're not interested in waiters who leave people with empty drinks.
They're interested in grilling waiters who don't upsell enough alcohol.
Even if it's a guy/gal who has a natural talent for attracting clientele and had increased your business - or any other number of useful traits, which don't show up on a spreadsheet and therefore s/he's going to be "reviewed" onto the chopping block.
Metrics are usually genuine; the conclusions attached to them are usually voodoo.
You can shove your whole "bcus terrorism" right up your ass. Of all the bullshit cudgels, it's the most exploited. Worst infocalypse horseman.
Go buy a tiger rock.
Selective enforcement is a fancy way of saying "our rules are XY and Z but also Whatever The Fuck We Want"
Then I am 100% confident they would have named it Suckr
you're a chink go back home
...
So... what, did you burst into flame? Melt like the wicked witch?
If you want to vilify talk, I suggest targeting misinformation. Maybe homeopathy. Antivaxxers. Y'know.
But even those won't convince me "only approved speech is allowed" is a good idea. And neither will people insulting each other.