Literally just mainlining marketing material straight into whatever’s left of their rotting brains.
372 comments
Death to America
this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2023
226 points (99.6% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15978 readers
2 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to [email protected]
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Shit can’t even do my homework right.
He may be a sucker but at least he is engaging with the topic. The sheer lack of curiosity toward so-called "artificial intelligence" here on hexbear is just as frustrating as any of the bazinga takes on 
. No material analysis, no good faith discussion, no strategy to liberate these tools in service of the proletariat - just the occasional dunk post and an endless stream of the same snide remarks from the usuals.
The hexbear party line toward LLMs and similar technologies is straight up reactionary. If we don't look for ways to utilize, subvert and counter these technologies while they're still in their infancy then these dorks are going to be the only ones who know how to use them. And if we don't interact with the underlying philosophical questions concerning sentience and consciousness, those same dorks will also have control of the narrative.
Are we just content to hand over a new means of production and information warfare to the technophile neo-feudalists of Silicon Valley with zero resistance? Yes, apparently, and it is so much more disappointing than seeing the target demographic of a marketing stunt buy into that marketing stunt.
Are we just content to hand over a new means of production and information warfare to the technophile neo-feudalists of Silicon Valley with zero resistance? Yes, apparently, and it is so much more disappointing than seeing the target demographic of a marketing stunt buy into that marketing stunt.
As it stands, the capitalists already have the old means of information warfare -- this tech represents an acceleration of existing trends, not the creation of something new. What do you want from this, exactly? Large language models that do a predictive text -- but with filters installed by communists, rather than the PR arm of a company? That won't be nearly as convincing as just talking and organizing with people in real life.
Besides, if it turns out there really is a transformational threat, that it represents some weird new means of production, it's still just a programme on a server. Computers are very, very fragile. I'm just not too worried about it.
It's not a new means of production, it's old as fuck. They just made a bigger one. The fuck is chat gpt or AI art going to do for communism? Automating creativity and killing the creative part is only interesting as a bad thing from a left perspective. It's dismissed because it's dismissals, there's no new technology here, it's a souped up chatbot that's been marketed like something else.
As far as machines being conscious, we are so far away from that as something to even consider. They aren't and can't spontaneously gain free will. It's inputs and outputs based on pre determined programming. Computers literally cannot to anything non deterministic, there is no ghost in the machine, the machine is just really complex and you don't understand it entirely. If we get to the point where a robot could be seen as sentient we have fucking Star Trek TNG. They did the discussion and solved that shit.
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(31 replies)
Whenever the tech industry needs a boost some new bullshit comes up. Crypto, self driving and now AI, which is literally called AI for marketing purposes, but is basically an advanced algorithm.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Honestly I don't know that you can have non embodied consciousness. These people are acting like they are replicating a thing that already exists, bur that's not the case. Everything we have ever come across that shows sentience, basically however you define it, is an organism of a sort and "consciousness is an adaptive aspect of that organism. I feel like asking a computer to convey is like asking a lake to talk. This isn't to say that I don't think it's possible for us to build synthetic consciousness in theory, only that what these people are marveling about is really order's of magnitude more simple than the simplest of organisms. Like our consciousness is FUNCTIONAL it serves a purpose as part if our totality, to separate that from being embodied, and even a brain in a jar is still embodied, seems like it's missing the point. Like to compare a software program that can just be slapped on whatever computer you want to human consciousness is a category error.
load more comments
(3 replies)