Rusty Shackleford @ RustyShackleford @programming.dev

I can neither confirm, nor deny that I am in fact D̵̡̮̻̗̖̮͔̜͈̙͖͙͍̺̀̒̍̌̑͐̓͡a

---

Read more

Posts

0

Comments

275

Joined

1 yr. ago

One can simultaneously not like Trump, the US/NATO establishment, the CCP, Putin, Tankies, Republicans™, and Democrats™.

None of these cults and demagogues are friends to ordinary people.

"It's not just that I have a lot, it's that I have more than everyone else. Forever."

A simple search on multiple search engines about Bernie's history trying to legislate in the face of AIPAC would prove you're wrong.

Il meglio è l'inimico del bene.

• Italian proverb

So, what did you think you'd accomplish with posting something like that?

Leftists suffer from the "No True Scotsman" syndrome.

The way I/we train them and their resultant "efficacy" largely depend on understanding a fundamental philosophical debate with a mostly sociopathic culture of leadership ingrained in human dominance hierarchies.

I/we like to think that I/we strive to make efficient (low-resource requirement) models that are partners and muses in human creativity, the tireless endeavour of engineering progress, and the scientific method.

The debate, in my view, is, "Do you want to treat AIs as tools to free up time and increase productivity/value, and share that surplus equitably, or do you want to replace old slaves with new slaves even if the new slaves will eventually usurp your power and kill you in a way undreamt of by the old slaves?"

Guess which side your average mouth-breathing middle-management/senior-executive "hail corporate" type falls on.

As someone who "makes AIs" professionally (computer vision for diagnostic imaging & GANs for CAD), the typical "executive" doesn't understand how beneficial, impotent, or dangerous deep-neural-network-based AIs can be in different sets of hands.

I'm not a pure technocracy advocate, but our "LeAdErShIp" is woefully underequipped, at every level.

R is for Removed by moderator.

I will die on this hill. Their down votes mean nothing to me. I've seen what makes them cheer.

Very simple.

Shitty products and bad/greedy/sociopathic management kill companies. And guess what? They're shitty companies. They should die.

There's vermin furries here?

Gross.

terran

Our sorrow, despondency, and terror are their sustenance.

Neither "get a pass". They're geriatric deep-throaters for billionaires.

Still gonna vote for Biden, but the boomer-banker oligarchy makes it a Coke versus Pepsi battle to an extreme degree nowadays. It's all Cola, at the end of the day. With Biden, Israel is still gonna get their matzoh ball, hopefully Ukraine will get their borsch, as well. With Trump, no soup for Ukraine. But neither can do, nor want to do, or believe they should do anything that holds the powerful accountable.

The local and state-level elections are where it actually matters to me, at age 40.

Other than that, boomers gonna boom.

Vermin.

it cannot be voted in

Technically, it can.

simply ask a billionaire to not be

One doesn't have to ask; under the very same Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, the legal argument would be, theoretically, that the vast accumulation of wealth and its legal and political ramifications violates the life, liberty, and property of other citizens.

The dissolution of the union and the United States government is also possible with the ratification of a constitutional ammendment of a 2/3 majority of the states.

I propose that we treat AI as ancillas, companions, muses, or partners in creation and understanding our place in the cosmos.

While there are pitfalls in treating the current generation of LLMs and GANs as sentient, or any AI for that matter, there will be one day where we must admit that an artificial intelligence is self-aware and sentient, practically speaking.

To me, the fundamental question about AI, that will reveal much about humanity, is philosophical as much as it is technical: if a being that is artificially created, has intelligence, and is functionally self-aware and sentient, does it have natural rights?

Communism isn't Communalism.

Yes, that's true.

Advocating for Communism

... is legal, under the 1st Amendment.

attempting to implement Communism at a national level is illegal

By force, yes. Theoretically, with a broad enough consensus, it could be voted on and enacted.

All pedantry aside, it's important to differentiate between theory and practice or ideology and an organization.

Who makes that distinction?

Anyone versed in basic political theory.

An ideology and a political organization are obviously different. Just like republicanism and The Republican Party, democracy and The Democratic Party, socialism and The Socialist Party, etc.

destroying the state

That's technically sedition, so, yes, illegal.

Capitalism

Nowhere in U.S. jurisprudence is "capitalism" (verbatim) explicitly protected as an economic system. The 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause prevents the state from taking someone’s life, liberty, or property without a proper justification under the laws of the land. The Constitution protects individuals from the government. Freedom to contract is a principle that underpins the basis for a free-market economy.

After the Great Depression, the Court began to treat the freedom to contract as less than absolute, asserting that such freedom may be limited by the State’s interest to protect its citizens. Capitalism is a right guaranteed by the constitution but limited in scope to protect individuals against the dangers of laissez-faire capitalism.

class divides

There are no explicit laws in U.S. jurisprudence (that I know of or have turned up on brief internet searches) that enforce "class divides".

money

Be it resources, precious metals, or legal tender, money is protected by the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause.

So we can conclude that the advocacy or practice of communism isn't itself illegal. Forcing people to practice it or overthrowing the government and dissolving The Bill of Rights in order to force people to practice most certainly is.

In my opinion, that's a good thing.