igorkraw

Me. Because I used to love reviewing conference papers and AI has utterly ruined it.

If the end result was reliably good people wouldn't be hating on it, but the vast majority of people are using AI not to elevate their output quality, but to churn out slop quantity, because that's where the incentives push them.

Anyone who actually engages with the output can tell that the speedups you get on producing good prose, maintainable codebases or high quality abstractions are much much less because you can't let the LLM go brrr, so AI output tends to be drivel, and banning it is a good way to prefilter.

It'd the same reason journals and conferences desk reject you if you don't follow their formating rules or don't use their template - it's a price of admission that ensures some consistent quality level, and if you couldn't be bothered to learn how to follow the rules, why should we trust you that the content is worth out time?

I got the popup and clicked away because I don't have time or tolérance for AI interactions, but a friend of mine has been organizing people with critical opinions to give their takes as a way of putting strong criticisms of AI companies on their own website and reach out to the anthropic workers to try and make them see they are building the panopticon, I'm skeptical that anthropic won't censor everything but would be interesting to see whether that effort will actually move the Overton window a bit

In smart psychopath Logic, because life is a repeated game and you will have moments of weakness and imperfections, so you would like the world to he in a moral equilibrium where even if you let your guard down for a moment you will not risk immediately be butchered by the other person. The game theory of collaboration and nice mess is pretty solid once you account for transaction costs, risk, repeated interactions etc.

For most people, given that they are part of a species who's superpower is collaboration at planet scale and who evolved accordingly, the hedonic pleasure of acting morally congruent and being embraced by a community, as well as hard wired tendency towards empathy does the rest of the trick. How you grow up and what trauma shaped your intellectual and emotional development will affect who you consider worthy of empathy and care ofc.

Thanks! Sorry if I missed it. I had clicked ok the download on the page and it only pointed me at Mac.

If you can create an aur it'd be awesome for the arch crowd :-)

Looks cool :-)Linux wen plz so I can play with it?

Are humans without agency then?

There's more ways of neutralizing power than meeting it with equivalent threat. You can also make it not worth exerting the power, or introduce enough friction to let it evaporate itself.

And so far, the highest historical power concentrations have always been un-stable, while the polities that put checks on that power and embed themselves in cooperative trade networks lasted for much longer

Sure, and now compare polities which manage to keep defection to a minimum or structure the process of "defecting" to serve the polities purpose instead of being truly adversarial. Bruce Bueno de Mesquitas "the logic of political survival" and various works by daron acemogolu have the data on how much better these polities do.

If there's no pure play dominant strategy, you will always get a fraction of defectors willing to try their luck. But coopération still emerges, and the polities that manage to cooperate more still tend to survive and thrive more.

Yes, I messed that up based on phonetic recall I think. Thanks for correcting

Sure , it's difficult, and not always possible,but maybe we should treat it as what it is (an unfortunate reality) rather than creating false valor.

I don't think people are unaware of the reality of real life, and the ones that are won't wake up if you terminate them in college. If we want to make sure, make them do mandatory work Placements instead of the grades, to experience the pressure of real world without risk of career failure

You should learn about chimpanzee wars and how dolphins treat tortoises, and about the enslaving ants

In game theory, cooperation is a dominant strategy and evolves consistently. Slave owners and other injustice committing humans often invoke "human nature" out of trying to cope with their knowledge that it is wrong but whatever trauma or other thing makes them do it anyway, to absolve themselves of agency.

(To be clear, not targeting you personally here, but targeting the rhetoric and fallacy)

Not really, kindness also exists. It is the escape hatch from the evolutionary zero sum game and let's you pick a better equilibrium (bargaining vs pure Nash).

We can just not fight. There is enough room and resources,we can get more of them and build more efficient tech, and we are all more alike than different.

Which of I understand the Wikipedia article correctly would mean it's a euphemism for "there are no just wars"?