[-] swlabr@awful.systems 10 points 9 months ago

Nah dawg it’s the fact that his “incredible solid and well argued” moral framework finds it impossible to unequivocally denounce a fucking genocide that means that maybe it’s not nearly as solid as you say.

[-] swlabr@awful.systems 10 points 2 years ago

I get what you're saying, but I feel like this and that are two different things.

I think there are plenty of smart people that understand that Google can and will do this sort of thing, but will also pay them a buttload of money.

[-] swlabr@awful.systems 10 points 2 years ago

Great, now LLMs are gonna format all their output as email-indented reblog chains.

[-] swlabr@awful.systems 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

used to be” I mean that part tracks at least

[-] swlabr@awful.systems 10 points 2 years ago

dawg if I have to grok rat doublespeak I might just double plus unalive

[-] swlabr@awful.systems 10 points 2 years ago

I stand against confiscatory taxes, totalitarian collectives, and the ideology of the inevitability of the death of every individual,

“And that’s why I’m announcing project Kenjaku-Orochimaru, where I find twinks to transplant my brain into”

[-] swlabr@awful.systems 10 points 2 years ago

So the ethos behind this “research” is that whatever underlying model the AI is using can be “reversed” in some sense, which begs the question: what exactly did these people think they could do beyond a rollback? That they could beg the AI to stop being mean or something?

They were probably inspired by the blanka creation scene from the street fighter movie where they brainwash some guy by showing him video clips of bad stuff and then switch it to showing good stuff.

[-] swlabr@awful.systems 10 points 2 years ago

is this written by a grown man or a 14 year old emo kid

yes

(the MC is jughead from Riverdale lel)

[-] swlabr@awful.systems 10 points 2 years ago

RE: your original comment. Reminded me of this LW post from half a year ago (discussed here)

RE: the followup edit. God, that is sad, and par for the course. Removed from context, I resonate with the youthful hopefulness of thinking you'll change the world, followed by the slightly less youthful hopelessness that changing the world in any meaningful way is much harder than what was quoted. Staying in the orbit of LW, NRx and other right/far right corners of the blagosphere is definitely not setting oneself up for success.

Also yes in their attempts to moderate and elevate their level of discourse, they've hamstrung themselves in many ways, least of all in being able to tell this dude to stop and get some help. It's like 10% of why they seem so humorless, self-serious, and unable to change (the last 90% is because they are humorless, self-serious, and unable to change)

[-] swlabr@awful.systems 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Best case, in their inability to recognise that they already in a cult, they create a schism that eats up the rat community once and for all. Unfortunately rats seem to be schism resistant tho.

I mean what’s a sex cult without a little sects?

[-] swlabr@awful.systems 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

(Numbers added by me for easier back references)

Examples of epilogenics

1) Selecting an embryo for lower disease risk, higher intelligence, or some other trait good for both the individual and society
2) Gene editing for the purposes listed above
3) Choosing an attractive spouse

Examples of things that are not epilogenics

4) State-sponsored sterilization of people deemed “unfit”
5) Rules against marriage of family members such a siblings and cousins
6) Things people think of as eugenics even though they are often bad for genes (i.e. genocide)
  • 1 with the qualification of “good for… society” is just 4) with extra steps. 2) is just 1).
  • For 3), unless everyone you are dating never wears makeup/grooms themselves in any way, you probably aren’t looking at much genetic influence. You are probably instead just selecting for socioeconomic bracket, which is totally not what any of this is about, right?
  • For 5), is the implication is that the OP thinks anti-incest laws are eugenics and therefore bad and therefore should be abolished???
  • 6 Aella definitely googled “things that are bad for genes” with voice to text, got back “regular washing” and took that to heart

Other:

  • I didn’t know the “eu” in “eugenics” came from greek.
  • Now I’m thinking about that whole “eudaimonia” thing from a while back. Every time it pops up in my head I think “Eudaimon now dog!” I wonder how YTMND is doing these days.
[-] swlabr@awful.systems 10 points 2 years ago

Damn, I’m very much in the camp of needing to taste the dish first, at least. Guess we gotta fight

view more: ‹ prev next ›

swlabr

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 2 years ago