I broadly agree with their sentiment but

• I basically agree with this one. I don’t agree with climate change being a rapture but I believe this point isn’t meant literally.
• The whole point on race is poorly argued. First, the original claim is just a figure of speech it is not meant to be a prescription. Their argument that it’s a lie doesn’t make any sense since they DO agree that black people have to work harder which is the speakers point. So they are essentially just failing to understand a metaphor. Also it’s weird to make a single point that both says “Things are so much harder for black people” and also “this affects all races”, they kinda just don’t fit together rhetorically even if logically it’s consistent. Also “get’s us to the starting line” uuuuuuuh we’re well past the starting line, racism aside. Racism and other prejudices feel like a consequence of being after the starting line, not before it.
• Idk what to say, success exists. It’s possible to be successful even in a “explotative, supremacist, advantage-imbalanced, wealth-dominated system”. I see their point about it being a shallow success but they go too far by claiming “there is no point at all”. Also contradict themselves by saying there is no point but also you should desire for more. I acknlowedge that life is not fair and your circumstances of birth dictate the majority of your life but I also believe aiming up is really the only rational conclusion. If you don’t work towards some definition of success (which can be defined another time) then what’s the point of life?
• They don’t really refute heaven existing, just assert that hell also does. As a metaphor in isolation it works but when the lead in is “Heaven is a lie”, the rebuttle looks more like a literal claim. And gaza isn’t literally hell. They reject the claim but the staple heaven & hell onto the real earth and it just doesn’t work as an argument IMO.
• I’m not touching that whole “quantum tunneling” thing… Call that one ‘the one that doesn’t fit’ I guess.

. It does what you tell it

You can’t just pick which parts of it you are ok with anthropomorphising and pretend that’s an argument. It does not do what you “tell it” as it has no ears right? No ability to be told anything? It’s just data input via electrical impulses in a processor somewhere right?

It does not escape

It can “escape” (which I wrote in scare quotes on purpose to dodge this pedantic rhetoric but pedants have a way of finding me) in the sense that it could clone itself to an external device with open ports and then operate from there, and continue spreading. Just like Worms have been doing for decades, except this one has the capacity to self augment and find new technical vulnerabilities, choose to lay dormant, etc. I’m not claiming it is “caged”, like an actual animal, just that it is currently contained and could do something that looks like escaping.

If it does something bad it was told to.

It’s a stochastic system. It does not require human intent to do something. I agree the human operators are still responsible for the outcomes of using a known stochastic system, but your claim is still fundamentally false.

But Reddit mods told me misandry fundamentally cannot exist and it is logically impossible to be sexist towards men while in a patriarchy

So you’re lying.

I’m glad some people are getting it.

It depends on what you mean.

• Do I believe the events attributed to a rogue AI actually happened? Yes
• Do I believe the ‘rogue AI’ actually gained sentience in some way to combat it’s reward function? No
• Do I believe it’s possible for an LLM to effectively “break free” and truly “escape”, cloning itself everywhere? Yes
• Do I believe LLM companies orchestrate these “rogue AI” incidents for profit? No not really, but maybe
• Do I believe that, once the event has occurred, the LLM companies maximize spin and fear mongering for profit? Yes absolutely.

Real talk I’m surprised some tech bro hasn’t made that yet. Like not hiding it, just fully branding it as an AI-first replacement for Reddit/Twitter.

The user could describe the type of content they want to see or “world event” they want their “community” to experience. Like a medival twitter, and have a political plot develop between two kingdoms and the human user’s engagement on the thread can help sway public opinion on the subject leading to different narrative events.

With a world of 8 billion people, there are enough out there that would enjoy it…

Over a decade on the internet and I still don’t know what to do when I agree with someone’s general point but disagree with their logic in support of that point.

I vividly remember my dad telling me football was “too complicated” to explain and so I just assumed it was some mystical unknowable sport and checked out of any conversation involving it.

It wasn’t until I was like 25 that I put any effort into understanding the sport and like… He could have just told me “we want the guys in blue to get the ball and run to the other side” and then we could have bonded over that. Weird thing to be lazy about as a dad.

daddy*

deleted by creator

Turns out it was just a coincidence

An actual, healthy, good online social ecosystem. A place with deep quality conversation without bots, trolls, rage bait, misinformation, etc. Somewhere that felt like actual community.

Which is a shame considering the Linux distro has never ever once ever ever ever contained a bug

“Greater territory of Taiwan”

You’re right. Nothing has been stolen and then treated as public property in our society. I am fool, and you are a god.

Anyways

Nah.

If you view corporate social media like fb/twitter/reddit as a morally wrong + negative influence on society, then this is a moral win thus worth celebrating.

Especially when you add in that the main barrier to any social media product gaining traction is first hitting that critical mass of enough posts to make it worth returning to -> habit forming + habit replacing.

AS I said to the other dude, I’m not going to keep coming up with examples because you’ll just keep moving the goal posts. There are tons of examples of something of value, natural or man made, being stolen and later treated as a common good.

Just do some research.

I’ve probably seen 500 instances of accusations of appropriation and I’ve seen maybe 4-5 of that were were actually real appropriation and real harm.

It’s an internet buzzword. The pattern is real but the internet zeitgeist around it is rage bait BS.

Race based humor is icky actually.