![Oh God, Make it Stop [1200x1487 - 220KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/P3cKJh.jpg){kind=link}
Anybody ever think about how the psychological effects of believing that the powers that be are this advanced might cause a group of people to defer to them when a pandemic hits?
You have insight. Power is a shadow on the wall.
"Power is a curious thing... Three great men, a king, a priest, and a rich man. Between them stands a common sellsword. Each great man bids the sellsword kill the other two. Who lives, who dies? ... Power resides where men believe it resides; it's a trick, a shadow on the wall, and a very small man can cast a very large shadow." Lord Varys, spymaster (Edit: Attributing quote)
Example: Internet users believe they are constantly being monitored and there are shills everywhere. While there are certainly some shills and some monitoring, it's easy to forget how fucking incompetent the alphabet agencies are. We quake in our boots whenever someone posts a comment that remotely hints at suggesting violence, because the FBI/NSA/WTF is watching. There simply are not enough man hours to go over all of the data that is collected- but people's fear of the FBI, or the police, or whomever- that fear is the boot on their neck.
Yes and no. Like the matrix and NEO at the beginning running a search on his computer for the information on the Matrix. They can find stuff but there is no AI. It's impossible since that would indicate awareness and machinery has no soul. Now a machine like a fool "me a week ago" can be programmed to act in a way.
So they can watch by setting up scripts to look for words or "patterns" but to just watch, no. If they find a lot of patterns or words that indicate people are thinking counter to a narrative then someone will be assigned to do a quick check on a site. Then they decide if the site or owners of site are the ones they'll attack with computers, words, or people that will do violence or use the laws against them.
I've thought this a while now knowing the AI bullshit is just like video games when you move in one direction the monster/enemy sprites a programmed to do a move or movement that has been prescripted.
I believe the smartest people realize this and find even the toughest vs computer games like playing against a 1st grader since they are far more intelligent than the person that programmed this game. Even with a series of scripts it's still got a predictability and this is why they went to online one on one since the smart people cannot predict a person with an actual mind all the time. A human is slower but their decisions are unique to them so unpredictable.
I hated the online MMO's since I'd have to trust and cooperate with strangers "no friends I was a dork" where if I was playing vs computer I only had to focus on the enemy in front of me and not trust the others in my party which I would always have high anxiety over if they'd just fuck up or abandon me. So realizing this fear gave me insight to my own self. AI is bullshit, like the news it's all smoke and mirrors when you pull away the veil and see the Wizard of Oz.
This is interesting commentary.
I believe the phrase artificial intelligence is a strategic euphemism. It's meant to give you an impression. Now, for reasons I don't have time to get into, this phenomenon of man seeing 'intelligence' in computer is itself a form of psychology - very deep psychology that projects the self-image onto art. In this paradigm movement called AI, we are seeing the wedding of art and technology. It's worth noting that at the true 'stepping points' in evolution, an intelligent organism's art and technology become the same thing. This is because computers represent man's self-projection of how he understands his own mind; computers are the result of one way of seeing our own minds - namely, in strictly cognitive terms. Modern cognitive science and computer programming are based on one way of viewing mind.
Note the way that as we have entered the digital age, the nature of digital itself has fed back onto man and influenced all of his speech and cultural representations of himself.
On an older and perennial way of seeing mind (not a physicalist paradigm), it is properly impossible for a computer to be intelligent. Intelligence in this regard is something transcendent and extended, not just in a single organ. Another way of putting it is that something like a body and a brain are necessary but not sufficient for intelligence. More exactly, this is what's called the intellect. On such a view, a computer is just techne; it cannot possess an intellect, although a machine can behave mindedly and show the hallmarks of intelligent behaviors.
Intelligence is really just a metric for being able to perform a specific task or small set of tasks; it's purely the result of human beings' interpretations that said task is meant to indicate such and such properties (spatial reasoning, verbal reasoning, fluid....etc.). IQ measures competency at a set of tasks and one's ability to perform them correctly and quickly. What does that sound like? Yes, it's a purely cognitive way of viewing mind. Is it true that the components of the IQ test measure the 'attributes' we think they do? Perhaps, but this analysis becomes 'intelligence' because it is statistically connected with a certain success parameter for individuals (like income at age 40, or something).
Can this be useful? Sure it can, because it's a functional approach. There is nothing here by way of identifying the 'substance' of mind; we're just concerned with what it can do.
With Musk's 'music chip', however, we're assuming that the experience of hearing music in one's head is also a purely cognitive task. It's one thing to view the OUTPUT of human mind in a cognitive framework, and another entirely to assume that one can INPUT data into that mind (via the brain) in a totally digital way and reproduce the experience of music. The functional way of looking at mental output (like in IQ testing) isn't concerned with what's ACTUALLY happening in the mind/brain, just what it does. Musk's claims assume that he, on the other hand, understands mind and consciousness.
Computers can be said to bear intelligence only on a functionalist view, where intelligence is just what something does when it is performing a specific, measured task. The possibility that computers could have awareness of self, desires and intentions is an entirely different question - my personal answer is: no, they cannot. Troubling as it is, however, we may reach a point that the cognitive and learning power of machines is so advanced that it becomes impossible to tell that they are not fully 'conscious' things (an idea explored in Bladerunner which is extremely relevant, unlike a lot of sci-fi).
I believe the use of language like 'artificial intelligence' has been an intentional euphemism to give the masses the impression that we are moving a particular direction, to see themselves in a certain kind of way (like a computer), and this also embeds a certain subconscious understanding that, if we are all forms of computer, then we are going to be replaced, and our replacements are coming. It is a remarkably anti-human phase we have entered, and it is showing in almost every conceivable way, in every part of culture.
We shouldn't need or want to be replaced. We find ourselves and our reason for being here in our labors. We'd all be Hunter BIden like if we all just sat, got entertained, had no responsibilities, and we'd never find God in that world. We'd feel we were like Kings without the responsibility or morality of making decisions but instead just the luxuries and no real conquests or deeds to accomplish. We'd be children that never grow up and never know who we are and then the earth would be dooms. In the Matrix the leader with NEO is in the underground area of Zion and says "We have all these machines to do everything for us but we don't know how they work or how to fix them so we are totally dependent on them".
That say is so profound and a real analogy of what life is like now. I thought I knew but I had no idea what a mystery our current society is to the ones living the DREAM now. They just work get money and even people that are old don't remember anymore and don't care it's just I don't want to die and I want more SHIT. They are empty inside and cold outside and don't even realize what they have forgotten, they just accept and avoid the thoughts that would bring guilt or way to many questions they don't want the answers to.
If you cannot accept the answers then you are lost and without questioning you're doomed in the end and your decendents are going to be sacrificed later, if you don't question and find answers then your ignoring the problem. Sure you cannot just leave the system and invent your own since that is a fast fix and won't last and likely be destroyed. You need to get everyone to fix it and be aware and that is the only way to fix it all. We must put ourselves in the place of the workers in slave factories, put ourselves in others shoes and ask for wisdom. We can't just throw money at it, that's what the problem is caused by like throwing wood on a fire.
It's like a bomb, you make everyone away of the bomb then try to disable it but the thing is our world is a series of bombs that need to be disabled and replace with something else simultaneously. We also have nukes everywhere and those can kill the effort so we much defend and mend at the same time. Most of all we must educate all at one time and make them believe but the average person is content in the dream and does not want to see the devil or what the devil really did, what he lied about, and how fucked up "ME" choices they made wasting their lives. It's the most complex puzzle in the world and I hear people here including me a short time ago saying just kill them and that removes the guards and creators but the trap that 7 billion or so live in still exists.
So the question is do we react with violence quickly, do we let the dreamers suffer so much they really wake up, do we allow the dreamers to die a bit so they see the horror and have a WTF moment. Then ask a question or have their soul ask why "ME" and get a shock and a happy one that is still amazing.
I see that the patient person sitting back knowing that we all have to ask in our time is the right decision and then they'll trust their own results and know who the one awake is and that killing and not assisting at the right time is the proper decision that hating is wrong and judge by what is inside and their actions is the right way to live and to think not about money but what is right is wisdom having considered what is right is not hurting others.
I think you're highlighting an important distinction here, which is where the phenomena are taking place.
In the case of Musk's chip, he is talking about computationally operating across the actual human mind and its qualitative experience, via the physical brain structure, using digital input. So you see, there is a false equivalence being made that the human mind is like a computer, or at least strictly like a computer in terms of all of its phenomena (like musical experience).
The difference with internet platforms like message boards is that they are human expressions in external technologies - like extended cognition - you could say they are taking human thought and giving it a large virtual space to occupy, and part of that transition means thought must take a form, as text. Now, any expression of human thought must take a form. But the physical nature of speech is such that if you aren't physically recording it with a device, speech is 'on the air and off again, just like that'. But with extended cognition in virtual spaces, your expressions are being stored on servers, they take a form that can be parsed and manipulated by computer algorithm. You are metaphorically feeding thought into a global mind with higher-order functions for organizing it - making you, in essence, like one neuron in a global mind. Right now, that evolving global mind is looking for neurons that are not Self.
I, for one, believe that the internet has evolved to become a kind of universal 'cognitive field' for effecting the singular mind, or the hive mind. The difference in the case of our online speech is that, because of the form it takes, it becomes possible to monitor using algorithms that target keyword phrases. I think you're absolutely right when you say that there aren't the man hours to accomplish poring over everything anybody says online. But there does exist the power to consolidate people to certain spaces and to monitor those 'centers of activity' in terms of language. You don't need to parse every message; you just need a machine to point out interactions: what kinds of language are generating the most activity? In that way, a human analyst can understand the culture of that space, or what the 'mind' there is like.
You can also experiment yourself by participating in those spaces covertly, like dropping colored ink into a stream of water to study the current. You drop specific messages or content onto the internet (at nodes that you already recognize as originating a lot of activity), and you watch where the 'ink flows'. They'll find that certain conspiratorial or dissident messages will naturally find their way through the network to places like Poal, for example. This is how they discover Poal and other similar places. Once you know the nodes, you've already done an enormous amount of work.
I fully agree that so many of the individuals in the three-letter agencies are incompetent, or just lack a general insight into the burgeoning internet environment, but it's not so much the individuals we must worry about. It's the aggregate competency of the entire federal machine and its resources that we are up against.
The worry is truly how our internet expressions will be coupled with our real-world activities. Look at what happened to Gypsy. We are typically fine IF WE STAY ONLINE; which is precisely how they want it. The honeypot really exists for when we decide to do something real-world. The powers that be don't give a single fuck about what we say online, as long as we are inside of our little nests (like Poal). It's that if we ever decided to do something materially significant in the world, now they've got all of the ammunition they need to determine the outcome before you've ever even personally stated your name in front of the justice system. Control of perception is what's at stake, as we've seen with the Chauvin case recently. The outcome of that case had been decided well before the very first court date.
In other words, the structure of the internet itself, as a global mind, is causing us to quite naturally self-segregate into our respective modules. Likes together with likes. The purpose of all of this cultural instigation across party lines is to give mankind the stimulus it needs to truly segregate ourselves. Because they want to flush out those people who will refuse to let their individuality bleed into the coming singular mind. These individuals are literally preventing that global mind from forming, and so at this moment we are in no less than a psychological war for what humanity is going to be inside of an unprecedented and potentially infinite new cognitive space.
(post is archived)