Updated Lemmy app list
Flumpkin @ Flumpkin @slrpnk.net Posts 0Comments 305Joined 1 yr. ago
Flumpkin @ Flumpkin @slrpnk.net
Posts
0
Comments
305
Joined
1 yr. ago
There’s no such thing as 100% objective morality.
Maybe not, maybe there is an infinity of variation of objective morality. There will always be broken people with pathologies like sociopathy or narcissism that wouldn't agree. But the vast majority, like 95% of people would agree for example on the universal human rights - at least if they had the rights and freedoms to express themselves and the education to understand and not be brainwashed. Basically given the options of a variety of moralities and the right circumstances (safety/not in danger, modicum of prosperity, education) you would get an overwhelming consensus on a large basis of human rights or "truths". The argument would be that just because a complex machine is forever running badly, that there still can be an inherent objective ideal of how it should run, even if perfection isn't desirable or the machine and ideal has to be constantly improved.
There is another way to argue for a moral starting point: A civilization that is on the way to annihilate itself is "doing something wrong" - because any ideology or morality that argues for annihilation (even if that is not the intention, but the likely outcome) is at the very least nonsensical since it destroys meaning itself. You cannot argue for the elimination of meaning without using meaning itself, and after the fact it would have shown that your arguments were meaningless. So any ideology or philosophy that "accidentally" leads to extermination is nonsensical at least to a degree. There would still be an infinity of possible configurations for a civilization that "works" in that sense, but at least you can exclude another infinity of nonsense.
"Who watches the watchers" is of course the big practical problem because any system so far has always been corrupted over time - objectively perverted from the original setup and intended outcome. But that does not mean that it cannot be solved or at least improved. A basic problem is that those who desire power/money above all else and prioritize and focus solely on the maximization of those two are statistically most likely to achieve it. That is adapted or natural sociopathy. We do not really have much words or thoughts about this and completely ignore it in our systems. But you could design government systems that rely on pure random sampling of the population (a "randocracy"). This could eliminate many of the political selection filtering and biases and manipulation. But there seems very little discussion on how to improve our democracies.
Another rather hypothetical argument could come from scientific observation of other intelligent (alien) civilizations. Just like certain physical phenomena like stars, planets, organic life are naturally emergent from physical laws, philosophical and moral laws could naturally emerge from intelligent life (e.g. curiosity, education, rules to allow stability and advancement). Unfortunately it would take a million years for any scientific studies on that to conclude.
Nick Bostrom talks a bit about the idea of a singleton here, but of course there be dragons too.
It is quite possible that it's too late now, or practically impossible to advance our social progress because of the current overwhelming forces at work in our civilization.
My dad was shocked to learn that the communists won
Even that is distorted - the Vietnamese people won under incredible hardship. Simple farmers, hundreds of thousands simply refused to bow to imperialist rule. They were helped, but they did the fighting.
But you can also argue that the US did "win" the war or at least their objectives. The objective was to stop the domino effect of socialism and they absolutely brutally devastated Vietnam for many decades. And that was their objective, to punish anyone who dares to redistribute wealth.
Hmm. It would definitely had helped if you could reply with emoticons like "lol" to classify jokes, not just with thumbs up.
Advances in AI could then also tweak the content sorting so that people are always kept in the optimal engagement mood. I mean they try to do that now.
Not sure what you're trying to say either, but fascist speech using lies is fascist recruitment. That is why autonomous anti-fascism is right to disrupt fascist recruitment events in universities. Because the state or moderates care more about maintaining order. So you have to disrupt the recruiting by any means.
So if your argument is that "sunlight is the best disinfectant" then no, it definitely isn't. There is historical evidence.
The eye tracking is very interesting. Would this support OpenVR?
Ideally the AI can actually learn to differentiate unhinged vs reasonable posts. To learn if a post is progressive, libertarian or fascist. This could be used for evil of course, but it could also help stem the tide of bots or fascists brigading or Russia's or China's troll farms or all the special interests trying to promote their shit. Instead of tracing IPs you could have the AI actually learn how to identify networks of shitposters.
Obviously this could also be used to suppress legitimate dissenters. But the potential to use this for good on e.g. lemmy to add tags to posts and downrate them could be amazing.
What about mines or chemical weapons?
At least she wasn't completely useless for this and actually said the word abortion. I haven't heard much from democrats suggesting or pushing any policy or solutions to this crisis. They seem to just leave the field open to let the republicans dominate the discussion.
“Unfortunately, if this direct violation of the organization’s governing documents and policies continues, Girl Scouts of Eastern Missouri and Girl Scouts of the United States have no other choice than to engage our legal counsel to help remedy this situation and to protect the intellectual property and other rights of the organization.”
Huh, wondered the same thing. Apparently written by Aisha Sultan.
The Last Ringbearer (annas-archive) by the paleontologist Kirill Eskov.
Eskov bases his novel on the premise that the Tolkien account is a "history written by the victors".[2][3] Mordor is home to an "amazing city of alchemists and poets, mechanics and astronomers, philosophers and physicians, the heart of the only civilization in Middle-earth to bet on rational knowledge and bravely pitch its barely adolescent technology against ancient magic", posing a threat to the war-mongering faction represented by Gandalf (whose attitude is described by Saruman as "crafting the Final Solution to the Mordorian problem") and the Elves.[2]
Macy Halford, in The New Yorker, writes that The Last Ringbearer retells The Lord of the Rings "from the perspective of the bad guys, written by a Russian paleontologist in the late nineties and wildly popular in Russia".[4] The book was written in the context of other Russian reinterpretations of Tolkien's works, such as Natalia Vasilyeva and Natalia Nekrasova's The Black Book of Arda [ru], which treats Melkor as good and the Valar and Eru Ilúvatar as tyrannical rulers.
Maybe that is what we need to do. "Decide" on certain moral questions based on best scientific data and our values and sound arguments and then stop debating them. Unless new scientific evidence challenges those moral edicts.
Somehow we keep going round in circles as a civilization.
There is nothing to keep you from using factors of 1024 (except he slightly ludicrous prefix "kibi" and "mebi"), but other than low level stuff like disc sectors or bios where you might want to use bit logic instead of division it's rather rare. I too started in the time when division op was more costly than bit level logic.
I'd argue that any user facing applications are better off with base 1000, except by convention. Like a majority of users don't know or care or need to care what bits or bytes do. It's programmers that like the beauty of the bit logic, not users. @mb_@lemm.ee
You forgot the journalists who frame narratives and the intellectuals who secrete the ideology that makes it all possible.
Yeah. But maybe this is how you teach an AI a broader understanding of the real world. Or really a slightly less narrow view. Human brains also have to learn and reconcile all these conflicting data points and then create a kind of understanding from it. For any machine learning it would only be an intuitive instinct.
Like you would have a bunch of these "tables" that show relationships between various tokens and embody concepts. Maybe you need to combine different kind of models that are organized and trained differently to resolve such things. I only have a very surface level understanding of how machine learning works so I know this is very speculative. Maybe you're right and it can only ever reflect the training data. Then maybe you'd need to edit the training data, but you could also maybe use other AIs to "reinterpret" training data based on other models.
Like all the data on reddit, could you train a model to detect sarcasm or lies or to differentiate between liberal, leftist and fascist type of arguments? Not just recognizing the tokens or talking points, but the semantic of an argument? Like detecting a non sequitur. You probably need need "general knowledge" understanding for that. But any kind of AI like that would be incredibly interesting for social media so you client can tag certain posts, or root out bot / shill networks that work for special interests (fossil fuel, usa, china, russia).
So all the stuff "conflicting with each other and making a giant spider web of issues to juggle" might be what you can train an AI to pull apart into "appeal emotion" and "materialistic view" or "belief in inequality" or "preemptive bias counteractor". Maybe it actually could extract and help us communicate better.
Eh I really need to learn more about AI to understand the limits.
Would it be possible to create a kind of "formula" to express the abstract relationship of ethical makeup, location, year and field? Like convert a table of population, country, ethnicity mix per year and then train the model on that. It's clear that it doesn't understand the meaning or abstract concept, but it can associate and extrapolate things. So it could "interpret" what the image description says while training and then use the prompt better. So if you'd prompt "english queen 1700" it would output white queen, if you input year 2087 it would be ever so slightly less pasty.
Oh wow it has eye tracking! I have high hopes for that feature.
But what I really want is to see and use my keyboard in VR and have an optimized desktop environment to pull up some text or document website quickly. I felt a bit trapped the last time I used VR and had to refer to documentations.
There is a very interesting documentary called "Professor Marston and the Wonder Women" and how they created her in 1940 as a feminist super hero.
William Moulton Marston, a psychologist already famous for inventing the polygraph, struck upon an idea for a new kind of superhero, one who would triumph not with fists or firepower, but with love. "Fine," said Elizabeth. "But make her a woman."
Not even girls want to be girls so long as our feminine archetype lacks force, strength, and power. Not wanting to be girls, they don't want to be tender, submissive, peace-loving as good women are. Women's strong qualities have become despised because of their weakness. The obvious remedy is to create a feminine character with all the strength of Superman plus all the allure of a good and beautiful woman.
No subdural hematoma would certainly be a delayed but direct result of the altercation. It makes little sense, presumably the police is lying / covering it up.
I've seen this list https://join-lemmy.org/apps
But I only want browser apps, or local hosted / electron apps. I'd have easier options if I finally switched to linux of course. I wish there was a good review to compare all the options. I use the basic web app on slrpnk.net currently but I do miss a few things. For example: