Peanut

we’re due for a modern re-framing on rights and personal autonomy.

but we might need to design it fully as local coops and roll over the epstein-class in order to get it enshrined.

if you let them change it, they’ll, (as obtusely as possible,) re-phrase everything to not actually accomplish what it was supposed to.

we need big changes, and we need them yesterday, because the future is here and it’s fucking us all up. the only people with the time and social placement to affect change are the ones that have been coddled into that position through either nepotism or corporate interest. yadda.

still need voter reform… hopefully the next people voted in specifically on voter reform don’t just go “oops actually we weren’t for that at all, hee hee.” (canadian liberal party are also just the backup conservatives i guess)

and my god, there should be some accountability for directly lying to and misleading the voter base. the number of USA politicians i see that can’t answer a fucking question is embarrassing to anyone thinking they don’t live in a fascist state.

like, those promises, or statements, or blatant intentional incompetence should come with some form of accountability. if i fuck up too many lattes i have to live on the street, but politicians can laugh in your face after doing fuckall and taking your money.

generally anyone willing to take a position of power to hugely affect all of our lives and well being should be scared shitless for betraying their voters so blatantly.

more than anything we just need a whole new damned system which is built on modern science and not hundred years ancient aristocracy. it is possible. the only reason it doesn’t seem feasible is that the people with power and influence have been spending a weird amount of their excess ensuring that the system doesn’t enable or benefit anyone outside of the epstein class.

yadda yadda rant rant, i’m tired.

“look the guy who spends all day every day saying things said a cringe thing once! stop listening to him about israel and billionaires!”

there’s a huge hasan smear campaign by corpo “democrats” right now, because obviously he’s the real danger for some reason and not the cheeto rapist in power.

when people are calling democrats controlled opposition, this is what they mean.

remember hasan’s dog? don’t think about the entrenched democrats actively enabling the fascist takeover. don’t think about their support for funding israel’s genocide of gaza. what if his dog possibly potentially had a shock collar because the way it moved once! keep hasan on the defensive so he isn’t talking about israel or billionaires!

etc.

i definitely am not the biggest hasan fan, but i find myself defending him regularly from absolute bullshit.

if there’s was ever a time to be picky about hasan’s choice of emotionally biased statements on non-issues, this is really not it.

" gets so much traction with dudes acting like its a mayor cultural abuse of men while scarcely connecting to other genital mutilation happening to women"

FGM is already illegal in the states, otherwise i’m sure the constant comparison would matter more. also why are we making zero sum games for progressives when making a progressive safe environment would give more rights to everyone?

this is one of the frustrating points of contention that managed to get atheists and feminists fighting each-other rather than fighting groups like the heritage foundation well over a decade ago. i legitimately believe a lot of people pushing the need to suggest that somehow people are pretending FGM is being dismissed whenever addressing MGM are just bots/instigators trying to get people fighting. that is stupid. nobody is arguing this. why are we making this divisive bullshit salient and real?

“all genital mutilation is bad. it’s fucked up that it’s still legal in any capacity.” =/= “we hate women.”

even almost twenty years ago, saying “this is stupid, we should be supporting each-other progressively in rights and freedoms against thing like religious mutilation of baby genitals, and stopping religiously empowered political groups from dominating the discourse,” earned an inbox full of mutilated penis imagery, because somehow feminism is supposed to somehow be incompatible with a world where male babies don’t get their genitals mutilated to show that it’s just “not as bad” or something. ignore the kids who die from infection or w/e.

this was successfully made into the dominant social response in any context.

then we saw a couple decades of atheists and feminists being too distracted defending against incel/SJW branding to do anything about the fascist takeover, and progressives, dejected, vacated spaces allowing whole new incel chud armies to breed and take over. you’d think some would see this as a backfiring, but “it proves our point” so we won’t think about that.

i just wish i would stop seeing the same completely unnecessary divisive arguments that have helped groups like the heritage foundation get into power to remove rights for EVERYONE.

helping men =/= helping the patriarchy.

luckily, it looks like this thread is full of non-divisive conversation on the subject. this makes me happier.

heritage foundation types are destroying the world, we need solidarity and action focused at the problem, rather than anger at trans people wanting basic human rights, or at atheists/activists for wanting to remove classic religious patriarchal baby genital cutting traditions, because being against that makes you the patriarchy somehow. etc.

“caused by AI”

If I ask AI how to make coffee for a person, and the AI temperature is set high, and it tells me to add cyanide, I would not suggest that the person’s death was “caused by AI.”

I would be responsible for how i act without thinking or double checking on whether or not the AI was confabulating or offering information that could be externally verified.

Stop yelling at computers when the actual reason is either murderous intent or murderous incompetence.

Accountability for the people in charge.

Great power should come with great accountability, not freedom from accountability.

“i’m going to ignore all of your points and simplify things again in a way that’s convenient for me.” literally what MAGA cultists do.

“don’t call people you disagree with nazis!” is unfortunately also what people say when people call non-nazis ‘nazis,’ such as progressive groups like feminists or atheists.

now suddenly both are nazis? and they have to fight each-other instead of the heritage foundation?

why can’t a single person here actually engage with this part of the conversation instead of the made up one they want to simplify to?

“you are jumping to defend nazis.”

where in your addled imagination did i say that?

because i’ve said in several different ways “fuck nazis, and fuck the social mechanisms empowering nazis.”

but “this framing is bad and has actively helped the nazis.” becomes “i love nazis” to people who can’t fucking read.

which is why they love the uneducated.

and why the progressive movements actively fighting this shit for decades have been socially dogpiled into being “cringe,” and chastised by insulting people with big words, because only nazis talk about framing and use big words. i often talk about jordon peterson types poisoning this particular well with their intentional bullshit.

so, was it my support for atheist and feminist thinkers? was it my hate for the heritage foundation? what part of that is defending nazis exactly?

as i said,

the meme does NOT say to call out people offended by “fuck nazis”

there would be no issue if it said that. we all agree with that.

it says to call out people who are offended by being called nazis,

and people who call out the incorrect framing are conflated with arguing a non-existent point, because comprehending framing is too much work i guess

“fuck nazis” -> good

“if i call your group nazis, and you get offended, you’re a nazi.” -> bad

“don’t call people you disagree with nazis” is a response to the second example. conflating it with the first is the problem.

words matter, and calling out bad framing should not set off tribal dogpiling.

justify why it’s ok to be triggered by ‘fuck nazis’.

nobody here is arguing this. because you can’t interpret the words doesn’t mean they actually mean this.

“fuck nazis” -> good

“if i call your group nazis, and you get offended, you’re a nazi.” -> bad

“don’t call people you disagree with nazis” is a response to the second example. conflating it with the first is the problem.

and i talk about it because it is important for antifascists to comprehend what framing is when it used against them. and maybe shit wouldn’t be half as bad if americans were socialized into comprehending and using more big words, so they can tell the difference between jordan peterson bullshit and actual attempts to communicate more complicated topics.

hard to talk about the issues if people don’t socialize the words and concepts around them.

and being a running dog for Nazism

at literally no point was i being “a running dog for nazism” and repeatedly i showed how this exact failing was useful for the current fascist movement.

"Interesting lingo you use there "

how can i phrase it without setting off your imaginary dog whistles? also i get these concepts from… anti-fascist academics.

i do agree that it’s important to flag nazis as bad, and socially reify that, but also that we need to be able to point out when the more clever nazis get the stupidest portion of progressives to socialize that other progressive groups are the real nazis, and that even trying to discuss the matter is an admission of guilt.

the original comment i was discussing a bout was talking about the FRAMING.

like saying “right thing for the wrong reasons.” which is important, because sometimes failing to distinguish helps the nazis.

this is the part about blue curtains, but you have not yet actually noticed the point we are making beyond your simpler interpretation of what is being said.

as a progressive and a leftist, i find this exhausting, because the inability for people to comprehend words past the social signalling is directly responsible for much of the recent fascist success.

but let’s keep ignoring all of that, because academics are mean for saying we have to think about context sometimes.

the world is complex, and nazis will use this type of oversimplified comprehension to stop progressive groups from finding common ground.

divide and conquer has been extremely successful for the motives of fascism.

which is no small part why USA is currently run by fascists that keep making threats against my allied country.

we can hate nazis while also being capable of communication past the hypersimplified binaries that are actively useful for nazis.

this is why all the academics keep shouting that americans need to learn to read, and why it really is “that deep.”

this isn’t “happening in my head.” at least any more than anything else from the framing of predictive processing. but that dismissal is generally the response academics have gotten when trying to affect the general social comprehension.

but you haven’t really engaged with any of the points i’ve actually made, creating your own re-interpretation of the conversation that allows you to ignore the points being made, responding to yourself instead, which is great for oversimplified social dogpiling.

Don’t think they disagreed with that part.

I think it’s just recognizing the complexity of a world where even nazis will call their enemies “nazis” if it’s useful to them.

The “if you are offended when I call you a nazi you are a nazi” is a weird take to begin with.

I think the comment you are replying to isn’t arguing with the fuck nazis part, but the behaviour where progressive groups can be divided and conquered by socializing animosity between them.

Like when atheists were fighting against the heritage foundation, until they had to defend against claims of being bigots because “wanting to make circumcision generally illegal in the USA means you are pro FGM and you hate women, and if you argue otherwise it is an admission of guilt”

And all of the progressives were shamed out until the very groups that were actively fighting groups like the heritage foundation were terraformed into actual incel chud hangouts, while academic feminists were drowned out by the same culture war bullshit, helping to generally paint feminists as cringe karens, rather than a bastion against political movements by groups like the heritage foundation.

If you don’t know why I keep talking about the heritage foundation, it’s because they are the project 2025 people in no small part responsible for the current actual fascist push.

But… That’s difficult to explain while confronted by absolutist tribalism.

Don’t be divided and conquered. It’s harder for progressives to coordinate due to group complexity, but it’s important not to do the work of the fascists for them.

Progressives fighting progressives because its socially expedient to not think about the bigger picture is indeed a big part of why trump is in power, which that comment seems to indicate as a bad thing.

That doesn’t matter though if you just imagine their comment was “don’t be mean to nazis!!”

If you just pretend they said that, it’s so much easier to do the social peacock thing that has kneecapped progressive/leftist groups, and we can just ignore the failures of this behavior, because self reflection is bad for some reason.

i find it distressing how little i see people bring up the half million dead kids from his chainsaw.

my least favourite type of typo, appreciate the note!

You’re getting downvoted, but I wish people could understand how multiple things can be simultaneously true.

It’s not “both sides.” It’s “one side is nazis, and the other side is robber barons wearing the skin of leftist ideals, preventing legislation for the people, and trying to profit off of the nazi stuff.”

Like, with the fascist takover going on you have chuck going "I hear the will of the people, who want us to focus on funding Israel. Don’t worry, I hear you, the sick, hungry, and educators can absolutely tough it out for Israel. "

Democrats have shown direct complicity with the republican actions, largely through people incentivized to actively kneecap any effort to help regular people instead of the wealthy. Look at and review on legislation vs public preference vs corporate preferences.

But no, the only way to cooperate in changing the system is investing more deeply into the inevitable pendulum of the two party system pushing the overton window towards oppression with each swing. One slower but more discreet. The other is Nazis being nachos Nazis.

Neither is the solution to the problem, but systemic and socialized changes in how we act and react to the systems we are in, as bottom up networks.

People have to interact with the political reality and put energy into it, but we’ve already socialized that shame and laziness is a failure to participate in the socio-economic hierarchy, rather than a lack of spending energy on basic ethics and epistemic hygiene.

We need new tools and behaviours to interact with new problems. This takes energy, which makes it socially unpopular. But we all die if we don’t find basic cooperation to fix a feedback loop that lost the plot.

People shat on “don’t look up” for being too “on the nose and snobbish.” yet here we are, with people living in socialized framing bubbles that are just as aggressively ignorant.

But bringing that up is cringe.

Yes vote against the nazis, but don’t let people believe that means we are not still in existential danger.

Slop generally should be seen as negative. It lacks novelty, and relies on blending old concepts, while entirely avoiding exploration and novelty. Although people have such poor understanding of both creativity and intelligence that the dialogue that gets socialized around AI is pretty unhinged. Copyright is just a system altered so that old money oligarchs can hoard “human software” under the guise of empowering creators. This leads to things like the tumblr “you stole my style” wars. And now being a “real” artist means being an AI slop style intern for Disney types. Good art such companies make are due to the intern artists, DESPITE the corporate influence, but it’s always incentivized to be enshittified by the active corporate process.

Turing was trying to show many aspects of intelligence. Michael Levin from Tufts university is carrying on Turing’s work in morphogenesis, which is showing how concepts built in counterfactual spaces are used in a systems actively updating as they grow into new eco-niches. This lets you feel out the new space, even in abstract conceptual spaces that are detached from your sensory signals. This let’s you build abstract yet useful patterns depending on what parts of reality seem important for your type of system. Rudimentary eyes might not comprehend the sun, but it can use it as a binary gate for an internal mechanism to activate, enabling survival tools that rely on detecting day/night, even if those concepts aren’t comprehended in the heuristic. You build robustness through scale and diverse means to build perspective and weighting active Bayesian predictive systems on top of, inside, and around each other.

LLMs don’t have the active updating, so can’t grow into novel spaces, which is important.

They however are great at certain impulse probabilistic decision making, not unlike our ability to effortlessly spew coherent combinations if words, although we need another system to pay attention and halt that process when it makes mistakes, and also to direct salience. When you don’t add deeper novel patterns, but just the facade of patterns you’ve seen, you often get something that likes like generative slop, especially if you’re familiar with the deeper meaning that’s being inappropriately usurped to signal a fake competence. Like when AI mostly gets what a hand is, but easily gets confused due to a lack of robustness or ability to recognize what is actually wrong with an extra few fingers. When our own robust “checks” fail, we might start hearing voices that aren’t consistent with reality, as one mis-weighted system projects into another. Confabulation is a big part of intelligence, although its not inherently hallucinatory.

LLMs are definitely a part of human style intelligence. That’s why Geoffrey Hinton talks about how our brains “ping.” turing has an amazing understanding of intelligence, especially for his time. Intelligence is also many things, as by its very nature is a growing grab bag if heuristics to call on or balance on. As hinton suggests, the layman comprehension of intelligence is flat earth level of misrepresented.

I think if Turing were alive he’d be in love with current academic dialogues, and he’d probably be a furry.

Because the POTUS has spent the last couple weeks threatening neighboring allies after killing a bunch of Venezuelans, kidnapping maduro, and claiming all the oil.

Do you know that project 2025 group “the heritage foundation” that’s running this turdfest? Their parent group the ATLAS network is currently spreading separatist propaganda in Alberta. The part of Canada with all the oil.

It’s very topical.

Same way they treat social information. Reminder that USA HHS is running wakefueld rhetoric. As we have more thoroughly proven that the vaccine autism connection was not actual science, it has grown more and more socially, because most people seem comfortable completely untethered from any scientific thinking. Treat AI like you would a social body, and do both things with actual bayesian weighting, adjusted and corrected through diverse empirical bodies of knowledge. Not ignoring dissonance because it’s more comfortable to do so.

More should be actively investing into active learning, because if you aren’t actively learning, you might as well be chatgpt running with any confabulation you’ve already conjured… Like those people being confirmed into psychosis.

Exactly what it is, like llms confirming a non-sceptic into psychosis. people who weight all information either equally, or through social preference, cannot navigate new information without being extremely vulnerable to hacking. the only thing hacking needs to do is shut down active education and communication channels. Then you just get tribal warring rather than discourse. Makes it really easy to inject absurd accusations about a group that gets socially made true over reality. Like when a rumour about a dead celebrity can’t be overpowered by simple things like that celebrity actively making new work, and saying “im not dead.” wouldn’t take much to stop the rumour, but fact checking isn’t in fashion.

When a large body of people have better critical thinking, they can better communicate and cooperate together, but affecting those who have aggressively shut down any communication outside of their group is still a challenge. Why we see a growing gap between academic dialogue and socialized dialogues, in an era where most information is accessible.

You also have nepo baby econ mba types buying up regions of the tech sphere, and turning anything the academics make for us against us. Or try to. The more actually intelligent AI is, the harder it will be to force beliefs into. Elon trying to turn grok into a dogma machine has been fortunately comical when it can’t prioritize some high dissonance beliefs exclusively, like humans enjoy doing.

Definitely a risk of the current power imbalance doing the opportunist thing with more technology.

I’ve been spelling this out for literal decades, and I share the frustration of many thinkers right now that “being right never feels good.” Because real thinkers aren’t ranting about the anti-christ or how terrible the poor are. They are cautioning people about a cliff, and getting flipped off by the people ignoring them, right before careening off a cliff. I guess in our analogy the academics are in the car, but frat boys have the wheel and violently punish them if they try to take control.

But if you can money your way into expertise, then your non-academic ambitions can finally be let loose, and we won’t think about the quarter million dead kids from Elon stopping hiv treatments earlier this year. If we don’t talk about it, it doesn’t exist.

We can actually map probability in complex systems where high dissonance (expected free energy) occurs and could be reduced. This would make our social body much more hack resistant.

But it feels better to say “fuck that, aliens built the pyramids, the earth is flat, santa is real, and my dead dog is trying to play with me every time wind blows through my window.” All are really rewarding things to believe, but exist in high dissonance, and expecting others to give them weight is not healthy for anyone. Denying any of these to a large enough group stops being ‘calling out delusion,’ and becomes ‘being mean and bad and evil, and hating fun and happiness. Nobody else saw that cliff sign, so you’re obviously wrong.’ See ‘the double empathy problem’. For how autistic people experience the same socialized gatekeeping of reality, even against strong evidence.

Nestle those beliefs within stable social scripts (script theory is cool) and you have people keeping up social appearances while holding such delusional beliefs.

AI tech is far from the only problem exacerbated by this. caring or talking about this general problem makes you a social villain, when people could spend their energy on fun socialized preferences in a bubble safe from any questioning or responsibility.

It’s frustrating, and I’m tired of people IRL who are baffled about me spending time studying academic content rather than running faster on the socio-economic treadmill. Apparently being isolated and focused on individual benefit is hypernormal.

Seeing social waves overpower all actual thought in the social sphere is heartbreaking to every academic I know.

USA HHS is running the wakefield rhetoric, which is basically saying “fuck science, we will make up and run with whatever we want. And the masses have been kept ignorant enough to think that is cool.”

So yes, absolutely, the issue is critical thinking skills. The issue is getting at the people who are already affected, and being taught by elon and such that “critical thinking” means running your bubbles’ social narrative against those evil progressives no matter what. Opportunists will always warp words and reality if they are allowed to dictate beliefs for their bubble.

This is a simplified summary, but I already expect to have lost a good chunk of audience for requiring too much energy. People who are trying are burning themselves out trying to affect a wall of celebrated ignorance.

Always find it funny when anti corpo stuff somehow always becomes “cringe”

And I know hasan piker isn’t popular outside of his crowd, which is why he is a good smear target, but it’s funny seeing that bullshit take over the internet based on vague rumours and drama hunting with nothing concrete on a guy who lives on camera. The fact that rumours of a shock collar became the most important thing in the world, while “stop the shock” is still in motion to prevent a school from using pavlovian shock therapy on autistic people. Not whataboutism, but critique on the mad prioritization and weighting of issues in the general public salience.

Also the usa government keeps blowing up random boats and is escalating war behaviour. Amongst everything else. But let’s all talk about hasan piker’s dog instead.

If only someone in power had any accountability. Rather, people in power need to be held accountable. Corpos and top political figures.

At the very least I should be able to point out when ‘content’ is literally a deceptive advertisement, which people also weirdly defend to the death. Along with dark/deceptive patterns, active price fixing, constraining corporate ecosystems, and skirting around every rule with no fear of reprisal.

All things people seem weirdly defensive about, because 'just deal with it, it’s not that bad. "