On Beep_Boop an honest investigation of fanaticism

- La Resistance independent -

- Report start -

So what's your opinion on emerging tech? On LLMS?

Your incredibly opinionated manner you himbo waltz into

The due diligence for your [ Perfect coherent interpretation here ]

That's most divinely reconciliatory.

Okay serious. Disclaimer this had fair use/fair dealing with attribution.

Short answer: My position is sociologically with the epistemics of Susan Haack, Henry Ferrel, Abi Awomosu, aesthetically with Masamune Shirow, intepretability from Matteo Pasquinelli. Discard the malpractice didney lawyers with culture war kruft. Digi-ethics research is like that within OSS and academics. Para-academically I go.

This sentiment makes me a defensive accelerationist affiliated with the Cosmo's institute and Audrey Tang. Yet, I rather create a new label, coining it a cyberfoundherentist! 

Reading this essay and coming to your own conclusions with the overall thing. Since I'll cover all the philosophical positioning and typology.

This has a guide of the technopolitical factions within and terminology

Utah has the Microblogging factions too.

If you want more typologies, You can pick the tribes of silicon valley to find your relation within Tech relations, here's mine.

Medium Answer:

This by Alice

It's a mixed review of the various critics of the venture capitalists and brings it's own conclusion of a solapunk/scrapunk. Garrison Lovely has a decisive take on Ed Zitron. I've had my own commentary with that model collapse.

"Most AI debates aren’t really about evidence. Instead, they’re arguments about futures that none of us have seen.

Nobody has seen superintelligence, a machine that most people agree is conscious, or a fully automated economy. Evidence can be gathered, but it underdetermines the conclusion. To fill the gap, we fall back on a combination of philosophy, political intuitions or, in some cases, tribal identity."

Oh, Kirby has a video too. Full Version
Andy Masley had a video too 2 years ago, with the catechism

Karl Mark and the german idealists have it. A free Article on it. About the essaykin of automation/augmentation. This is the long line of left techno progressives to technomehists < (I maybe one of them) On seizing the means of productions

In a marxist sense, even if I don't subscribe to it.

Along with Pure Koors videos for the furries

Now, time to right-fit your taxonomy of this ongoing technopoltic.

Long Answer:

Welcome, sceptics and hyper-believers. Or those who believe LLMs are Ontologically evil. 👋🛋

Refutations to respect polysemy of a new age to end the dogmatic eristics of a fantastical boycott. Of vulgar critical theory 💪🛋⭐ So with it, the social tech.

The intellectual case. Away from the prosumer

metrology outside.

This embarrassment of praxis ends here.

To the end of the art hall monitors with their false historiography. To point a finger at the AI denial industry too.

A doxastic space this blind dogma ends here. Couch Gregor is angry. 🛋🔎 He'll do an investigation.

With Gags. Then, like Ghost in the shell illustrator, you'll know his position.

"But Couch Gregor, what do you mean you with the code word draw buff dudes

in tho-"

Done intuitively and counterintuitively.
From the past, this was done before within this paywalled essay
~

To the note Dario Placed a note in the race

1. "It’s an important historic document — something that should end up in the Museum of How We Got Here, when the robots get around to building one — and I think it’s useful to hear how Amodei, now the CEO of Anthropic, developed his conviction in scaling. If AI transforms society the way Amodei thinks it will, documents like these may be the equivalent of Darwin’s notebooks, and I think there’s a strong public-interest argument for letting people read them. (Note: the full document runs to more than 25 pages. I am publishing only the first 10, since the rest is very dense and technical and consists mainly of Amodei arguing with various other AI safety researchers about why their suggested approaches are wrong.)"
   

   

Yes Kevin, I will go down to the dogmas that are presupposed with their precious, oh precious entertainment. Trivially true into the future.

(okay cool it Kevin)

is its useless/useful? Valueable/worthless? Model/medium?

Whatever valence to put [derogatory slur] or [laudatory commendation] of linguistic coding? Polysemancity!

🛋🔎🔎🔎

Look at all those Cartesian maps! Andy Masley bottom and Tree of Woe bottom right.

It's polysemic. Orthagonal. A big splotch

on the political map!🍅
So a go-go with non-expert couch Gregor.
A Social Tech that Henry Ferrel will say

1

Historical dungeon and AI Dungeon before things were innocent.

(well earlier than that) Since computation has begun.

It all started with a kerfuffle of reverse-engineering accidents involving Dall-E.

all of it was simple before

A call for beep_boop preparationism. No dog in the race. To end the ignorant assumptions, I must dive into the double consciousness of the artisan class. To that, with the couch gregor explains his multiple poistion.

Then a naughty publicity stunt.

It began.

Then after Alexander Avila, I'm like, why are we fighting? This factionalism or fandom had started. This is leading into a second-opinion bias encouraged by social media.

“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires. ”- John Steinbeck

So the temporally embarrassed double consciousness of the copywriter/graphic designers of centralised media.

Then Twitter became X, and then a spectacle happened. The Disney happened. Then the trolls declared open season on it; now it's a mess. The trolls have become snobbified. Something open source nominally got labelled as anti-centralisation. A false base for dialectics is not a way to go for it to be anti-worker. Such is the bad epistemology that had lead to this to seep of the brute truth to the power of the intellectuals and academics biting back at the entertainment industry.

Yet now..

We must have a discussion about this.

Decentralization and automony.

and I've had my investigations. My labels will have come and gone nominally.

Now that, as a preparationist, I suggest you hold onto your cushions. This one is going beyond the Ed Zitron, and Cory Doctorow.

Many yrs ago, I'm brought back into a crudeistic ways popularity of feminists being dogpiled and then now it's starting to bad ideas of critsian presuppostalism into the most woke tendencies.

gambleor (to a shooting applying similar here): "it seems to me like what is being stated is a principled distortion. The idea that (Bad actors hold positions which broadly brush believers of all stripes as though they are a monolith leaves them open to the same type of scrutiny." 

So we are now that stage of polemical convenience. With the partisan fanactism from this point

Beware of polemic commodity of critical theory into dysfunction.

Time to demand a clearance of conceptual confusion.

Of the insufferable wonks and of the copyright maximalists.

Do not harass this group, despite my illustration of them as nondescript clowns. This is a call to get out before it's too late. As the kruft of elsa-gate and reply happen, we are brought the understanding a new era.

@eternalism-when.bsky.social With the dystopia anti-humanist of Nick Land dommy-mommys (I don't kink shame!) Or Marc Anderseen

1.22 hrs. If you want the lowdown on this culture
So it drips into our knowledge industries.

"The recent and rapid adoption of generative AI (including large language models like ChatGPT and image generators like Stable Diffusion) has proven that this tendency is alive and well. As these new technologies seek footholds in the digital economy, we have already begun to see scam sites, high-profile slip ups, get-rich-quick schemes, and other digital malfeasance springing up around them like mushrooms after a brisk rain." 2022 was a year of hype, and of doom.

With the Elsagate hustlers moving on there next toy, and those who are angry that there own toy of platonic Hollywood ain't getting enough attention, attention is all you need.

Oh and that provocateur company does not have any serious indie behind it, silly venture capital, controversy marketing.

so, with the tech of the boomers, they come.

There is a mwurican thing happening.
(Tressie's response to a china article)
So the conflicts emerge.. So it's brought.

With the amount of conferences and secrets within along with bad models being released with Higgsfield

So now that we are here, here with the multiple interpretations of the indeterminacy. Along with documentary released with there inaccuracy's and you are here to clean it all up. With this html blog.

(Post edit CG here. To that )

oof

Only you will be the reader on our fine quest.

You're wondering. With all this Hype, gags within my joke to communicate.

They hype/and

I dunno Dario likes to shoot himself in the foot. Probably send it towards a goverment safety https://www.aisi.gov.uk/ or something like that. Then ther was the growing of Yud's safety of plzdontkillus 

Then somebody scraped somebody within the artstation fiasco, and everything went into think tanks.

Then, at 2022-23, this Bad meme was shared.

(lol)

So to clarify. It's time to go with another thing to provide robustness while considering the safety of substitution most of all.

We have to look at the fanaticism on the other side.

There's another movement I'm finding insufferable.

I'm not representative of the Sam Altman/Elon Xwitter fire of beep_boop, it's a specific of copyright law defenders of IP laws. I'm calling out this dead end of motivated reasoning. 

Away from Musk (I ate him in my zine, and that silly xai project my fictional giant destroyed it, I wish he got rid of AIx too. Yet none of my sex life.)

As the grifter reaches the too-good, perfect coherentism of hustle culture and Sam Altman's head of babbling incoherentism of 'stochastic parrots' with all that crunk. There was another group informally growing.

I got this propaganda CTA from a blog I shall not name.

Wow, the oligarch country.

Dogmatic Dialectics? Where does it go? Into the totality of the spectacle. 

🛋👁

Shameless. Well guess they don't have as sense of coherency. The anti-AI AI club

no to the venture capitalists behind this. This is a scalpel extraction.

(Oh, I don't support the OpenAI fudge-up btw, this is me handling a complexity.) I'll be misinterpreted and go several different ways due to reading comprehension.

The comfort of a bubble so that it all goes away from AI is low-key evil and advocates hustle culture/crunch. Taylorist in its destination of all it does. Thanks to the clown who started all of this. The moral panic is exhausting zealotry now. So I'm keeping it in academia and within a reading-blocked essay like this. (You're going to have to read this; I don't have the advertising budget and youtube production budget.)

Tesla and Nfts are stocks that have been in a bad market crash, IM) Now It's another turn. It's all stuck within microblogging, and that's the indictment of the celebrity culture there.

Wilfully misinformed Marxism or Leftism, or what Badmouse calls 'baby leftism' for lack of a better term (I call it 'wilfully misinformed' or preprosterism), has been hijacked by aburdist moral panic in the insular bubble of social media.

This epistemic certainty is gone now; the hills to die on are of foundherent presumptions, all justifications that I'm dubious of:

The false start of the historiography of histronic pattern matching. The biggest question is the licensing laws and economics.

Of So what of the obsoleting project that Garrison Lovely has predicted within-

"but ain't ai intrinsically doing theft? It's etiological design? It's impure-"

"Copright censorship? DMCA? Cease&Desists?"

NO✋🛋⚠ Not technically or intentionally. Ip Protectionism need to be revolted.

The alternative is worse. Copyright maximalism!

• Proprietary DRM and rent-seeking via copyright trolls because it was politically convenient. It's still privatisation of property. I'm not shooting myself in the foot, not my proxy to advocate for. These neural networks don't contain copies. Arguing otherwise will lead to danger. When the vulgarisation praxis hits, I'm out. Have to give it for fanart/fanfiction here. It's the worst possible argument of eliminative materialism of fair use.
  
  
  Any copyright framework that will forbid transformative works will have way more damage on startups, and fan art/remixes will be forbidden under the regime.
  
  Fan art and cover-band art will be banned due to civic responsibility moving from freelancers to commercial firms. Since the internet is built on infringement already. Along with a loss of bargaining leverage by the unions.
  
  So due process, freedom of expression, and freedom to oblivion > disney:nintendo racketeering, Sorry. Sooner that rule of law thing is respected. The less embarrassment I'll get from the entertainment industry.
  
  So, even with this moat they've built, we have to build around it in these decentralised spaces.
  
  
  
  It's going to be like the story of the derivative. With the brain implants. (No) Content Id from Disney/Nintendo.That's my Cassandra opinion.
  
  
  

  

  Re-create on resources on the encryption=/=recreation.
  

  
  Ccia again

  

  by acid communist substack
  

  This had with deepfakes (could be mistaken identity too); others I've

  addressed here. You can check in your weights then calculate from there.
  

  

  Not to say that there are irresponsible and negligent cases. It's easier to commence fraud with copy+paste though.
  Hijacking by bad actors attempting to radicalise to bad fundamentals like prosperity, (Nickels/koch group?) Weird centrist opportunists like EdZitron, My charitable interpretation is they bought in. This the enclosure of the entertainment media of the centralised media.

Is this yet another reach via an [AstroTurf/incentivised behaviour] Christian (family values) fundamentalist, along with their token supporters, to add confusion and disorder within the public sphere with all this lobbying? Yes. They are pushing this. Political tokenism, even to doctrinaire intersectional standards.

Se Gygas (with his substack I recommend has called this out with scraping and an open internet being a workers/masses way to aid. 

Flippo weights in on scraping too.

Common crawlers (even though Leon.ai used yet was)

Even with Recreate warning.

Nooo

Fan Art and Satire are at risk, undermining there case for transformative use.

THE NATURAL CONCLUSION OF ALL THE MORAL PANIC. Of a state-sanctioned monopoly.

ENTERTAINERS! With spectacle

interpretationism.

When they bring it like this. Schadenfreude for the malpractice lawsuit.

Bread'n circus.

Dynasour predicted this was the turning point

"Result of broken minds, that could be extended to other popular ideas online."
Later in 2025 he used the no true Scotsman with LLMs, yet that could be a lazy critism since he's stuck within audience capture right now.

or enemy of my enemy is my friend', kind of kruft.

It was branded left of 'stealing' and then made

a talking point. To a direction-brained take of team, not socialist principle.

Aaron Swartz would have disagreed with all of this.

When will they get over this textbook contradiction?

(I wonder what happen to Karla Ortz embezzling all those copyright funds into a reactionary regime.)

Nobody gets paid, Nobody in these decentralised spaces instead of Chuck Wendigs.

So yeah, expanding copyright is anti-worker on the decentralised, unorganised masses.

This anarchist went off on principle. Guess I'll resonate here with the open sourcers

against the propertarians.

To quote:

"X is just Y" may be one of the most insidious thought-terminating clichés I've seen, usually in AI art discourse, but also in other places; it carries some kind of implication that X is worthless or bad, but attaches absolutely no proof...

"Stable Diffusion is just collage!" is one of the most popular. Even though it is wrong, the error is not actually the equation being proposed. The error is the implication that being such *would* make Diffusion any less useful. The message of such a claim is not the content, it is the sentiment.

That's what makes this cliché so dangerous: it sends you to disprove something else of no importance. "GPT is just text prediction" *is* actually true. Yet people want to defend GPT, so they fall for the trap: they say "isn't human reasoning just like predictive text too?" Yet this is debatable.

It can even be completely disproved. As soon as you try to argue against the *content* of the affirmation, you've allowed the wrong debate to take place. The proper answer to these claims is much simpler: "So what? Text prediction is perfectly useful in its own right."

And so on. Collage is a perfectly good artistic medium, even if that isn't what image generation does anyways. Whatever the case may be, I like my tools, and that's all that matters. The gears that it consists of are not relevant to whether the machine is useful. Only I can see whether it helps me.

‪@palecur.bsky.social‬

· 1 Feb 2024

"(thing that is very much a transformative extension of Y) is just Y" happens *all the time* with startups; it is among the laziest tech bro dunk forms that exists"

X is just Y is terminally online social media brained. Designed for social media clout.

The cryptographers then went more direct.

The laws are radically self-defeating according to copyright law. My opinions are here.

Fraud Punctuating cherry-picking a de minimis and a Texas sharpshooter of a function; that's not what they were designed to do.

Or a mereological fallacy as Rahul (He's a technoskeptic) would say. Granted, with our interaction with the metrics here and the measures with dance here between our relations and modes.

Even it's backed by science of the generalisers. Text>image of the language (will) to Computer vision. Nature With that 

With it doing semantic search. There not referencing training data platonically, doing searches.

Even when hallucinations are lowering now. As one programmer says.

Or the propertarian thought-terminating cliché or cherry picking.

(Or wrong, for the non-believers out there.) Ip Protections for me not for thee does not work. Deontologically.

(even he's right here) There's not natural law attached.

So it's not worth my time with false DMCAing any copyright or that. 

As a human being. This is a case to be anti.

This is reeks of propertarism, by Richard if the immaterial thought being defended.

Yet we won't have to hope soon, those outside are speaking up with decolonial voices will seek to find a tomorrow sunshine. 

Even Kevin Kelly argues in favour

"1 .Text, images, or music, etc, are all expressions made by humans, which are copyrightable. During training LLM transforms these expressions into an abstraction called “latent space.” It takes one kind of thing – expressed content – and transforms into another kind of thing – an almost mathematical abstraction that contains no expression. This is why LLMs are called transformers. The latent spaces of an LLM are closer to something like a syntax which is not copyrightable."

Along with many intellectuals such as Andy Masley,Kevin Baker, Nicolas, and Henry Farrel. 

The no fakes is worst thing that will cause a universal destitution of the decentralised workers. Making style trade dress, that can bog right off.

Fake quote☝ (Oh Bryan L Fyre argued that he was incoherent, so we need coherence here.) Against megacopyright for unprincipled exceptionalism.

 This is not critical theory. Only blind mob rule that social media encourages.

Mob rule. Making memes to make a point. Since memetic art ain't orginal.

Oh, and there's that little detail.

Extremely confident training is fair use/dealing with that Amouri physical piracy. As digital redistribution isn't an entitlement.

This is the perfect analogy, and guess I'm feeling schadenfreude of such

a silly lawsuit that sent social media into ruination.

Such as EFF, Creative Commons and the Authors Alliance, which I stand with.

Critical theory ought to be against copyright/DMCA from now on.

Reactionaries promoting draconian AI regulation that will make age verification regulation a libertarian cakewalk. By Mark
Oh to repeat quote from my licence opinions

"oh This too. I feel like this is becoming cope bait. Again, too many bad actors hijacking."

(They took it down and developing there own, I haven't checked.)

Oh and the pile on to this was coarse and wrong. Yet I look like a busybody
spoilsport as they go on.
They're still doing in in 2026

Along with them selling there copyright (Platonic elitism) to private equite of entertainment companys. Fox Key weighs this

"This is funny because Disney creators don’t own anything

I think they were genuinely under the impression that they’d get to own what they make, but are stuck supporting a creative environment where they don’t own anything anyway, under the delusion that a corporation like Disney would support their interests.

This is why some years ago you really saw these people talking about how Disney and Nintendo or whoever would “destroy” AI because they personally dislike it. But now they realize they don’t own shit. They still don’t realize why. It’s the entertainment industry itself!

The problem with the US entertainment complex is that it depends so heavily on corporations, and the people working within it can’t even imagine a world where it doesn’t, but the corporations don’t have their interests.

Alex Hirsch doesn’t own anything. Dana Terrace doesn’t own anything. Guillermo Del Toro doesn’t own anything, Matt Youngberg (especially) doesn’t own anything. Yet they fail to realize the issue. They have less rights over their own works than the average fanfiction writer.

They’re desperately on Twitter posting, hoping that the corporations they work for will come around via the sheer power of Twitter likes, while Disney looks at something like Sora and how popular UGC content is becoming, and getting antsy about not getting that slice.

And these Disney creators are not longing for a world where they own what they make, or where someone can create something without millions of dollars. They’re mourning the death of a world where a brutal corporate rat race can potentially lead to creative fulfillment.

They’re nostalgic for the status quo of exactly 10 years ago, where after a period of decades, endless pitching and convincing to media financiers, they have a tiny chance of getting the movie to put something on TV, for the price of giving it all to those financiers.

There’s a catch-22 here that’s kind of amusing, both wanting to return to this world, and stuck denouncing it because those corporations now are getting different interests, while more or less oblivious to what is happening/will happen to media.

I don’t think that anyone really pictures what media looks like in a world with widespread real-time interaction and modification. I think even the people planning this are probably missing. Everyone keeps imagining “films, but the computer makes them.”

So, big content and big tech to consolidate.

So bu bye Disney @Lynn Cole

Since leftwingers have been arguing since 2010  from the acien regime and revolt over the system, here are some suggestions from the video 🛋👇

Held deontologically (universially) not selectively so transformative use of fan art is protected. Non-exclusive to 30 years and compulsory only. Social security nets and UBI or universal basic infinity tokens-what have you idc that's the plan for public intelligence. From First Principles! 🛋👍

Why are you so insistant on this Couch Gregor?
Our open internet is at stake if we do no avoid this step.

• As for the bubble metaphor, I don't have authority so I'll give my prediction, only a bridge can be made.


Link on that discourse. I've tried to speculate, don't hold your breath. Which is why I did my labor protection plans and other techno-progressive or d/acc strategies. Also learn some economics and try not to learn it from Kim Kardashian selfies. Blockchain and etherium networks moderated for rugpull hypebeaster



Thats another post and 8 hour video essay for your thoughts. It's likely to go up again. It looks like something branded as anti-left from decentralised sources, though; that's what I'm questioning.
• Water has been refuted, repeatedly; here we are. Not even a carbon footprint.
  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  So now with that, with the peeps making the base.
  
  
  

  OH NO! Property law is a John Locke-ian, deontological trap! What do we do?
  
• THEY TOOK OUR JE- Well, time to give my honest answer of the socio-economic conditions. Since I'm over the pond, I can't confidently comment on the geopolitics there. Only give the best answer for 8 billion humans!
  

  
  

  

  
  There is a structural shift within the economics of the symbolic shift of meta-knowledge within the economics, and only a fool brings AI optimism within an economic fight. So I'm going to look at the computerisation and the strategy. Of labor;compute ratio.
  
  Along with the Jevons paradox and it's misunderstanding!
  
  So other than labour protections within law.
  

  
  

  Automation is a matter of capital in regard to freelancers and firms. Too much epistemic certainty from those who aren't epistemic experts. (Post Edit: Also, what will get replaced are teleological, capitalistic, commodified jobs in the job market, like copyrighters. Also, it could create jobs, so substitution/automation. Soooo, let's not get so presumptive. Outsourcing already happens. So, what of it with the theory of the firm to this day

  
  

  
  

  Yet I know there are those who are influenced the most: journeyman graphic designers and commercial copywriters. So here's my blog post on THAT. Here's all my research. Plus more on LLMS.
  

  
  

  

  It's got tasty illustrations.
  

  
  (I'll put this on my TBR list too. He Seems like a pauser. There accelerationists too.)
  

  So there's the polysemy of substitution/augmentation (Got that from Cosmo) and there are solutions to both.
  

  
  

  Let the capitalist hypebeasts race to the bottom.

  
• Psychosis is a Base rate fallacy. (About minimal things) Liability increases police intervention and expands to mental health.  Even though I'm not fitting it in the pro-anti Manichean framework.
  
  It's a delicate issue so I deal with it there.
  
• No, Dopamine Addiction it does not, this is a general psychological refutation
• Other bioweapon riffs here's my thoughts on that, meme by Jeremy Bentham Presentism and white-hat/black-hat cybersecurity. The E A have takes with Biosecurity such as negligent advice. Chatgpt-40 did
  
  
• Luddism, , as reactionary things are bad. I know that's the double-sided side of small business (middle class/artisan/creative/petit bourgeois). Yet here we are. Neo luddisim does not of a coherent material bas to operate on. Think Jacquard Loom and not American anti-intellectualism.
  
  
  
• Also, reflexive consciousness is an argument of people who don't know, So I clarified my position here.  Skeptics welcome. I won't accept eliminative materialism. So Let's all get Philosophy-pilled! Thanks illustrations. With that skeptism of the paperclips.
  
  
  
  
  
  Functional/living sapience consciousness polysemy.
  
  It does express salience for metacognition with natural language input, so. While not deserving of a deontological duty, it can be treated with lower-order consciousness.
  
  GOLEMS HAVE SOULS! OKAY!  Oh, okay then, this will go in with philosophers on substack. Despite lacking self-preservation, this softward is coming.
  
  
  
  

  
  oh get your deontic correct as Maggie Ville does studies on non-being suffering. I've given mine for and against, and some say it's a red herring and suspend there judgement.

  
  
  I don't have complete certainty or gradualist consciousness, man that I am. So I can't comment on it. Yet I know the stochastic parrots sucks and the chinese room feels like a wrong now. Cannot play with that chinese room as others a pushing in.
  
  
  
  

  
• The clanker slur discourse has become ableist/racist. with bionic limbs, along with this being prosthetic intelligence. This is all high school grade status cruft.
  With it becoming a norm of hierarchy status.
  
  
  Ontological status games are one reason I left with this, tech bro, clanker, luddo, you name it. (Derogatory slur)
  
  Do they know of ontology? 

  

  
  
• The anti-humanity objection is suspicious since there are many reactionary tendencies within American exceptionalism narratives including there category of a left for apophenia and gibruism, chuck wendigism and copyright maximalist (Ism as in idealism) So here is two books regards to the mis measure of man in regards to there biological supremacy and all. So, Where did it go? From Auguste Comtes cult of reason and religion of humanity. It's like a new crunchy maha frumps.

Going through the audiobooks and look up with this reactionary historiographic of the category of human. Even though that 1dime covered it doe, despite a disbeliever of llm consciousness.

"AI art is only a “threat” to real art because the standards of what is considered “art” have already been so thoroughly lowered due to the process of “standardization,” whereby art becomes standardized into mass-producible cultural commodities designed for maximum profitability. Think about it. We tend to consider the top artists the ones who sell the most records. To sell the most records amounts to appealing to the lowest common denominator. And that is how you end up with Drake as the most popular rapper in the world."

Here's an example of a review I merely searched.

So, Even with the synthesis explore with Frantz Fanon, and the parochial supremacy and race realism being revived that Stephan J Gould for the 'artist' To what extent that Pete Wolfendale, another left Accerationist have to say.

Oh.

• Now what to do with the House Style Taste? The Masses have?
  He's following the eliminative materialist framework here, yet I'll sum it up. Brute fact the small business don't care due to supply'n demand. It's this gag all over again with fanartists. Yet, I shall not be elitist in this regards.
  

  Other than the obvious tells such as the rules of three, tells that appear, and it's like why not, you do you.
  
  

  
  

  
  So the tells with all this with standardisations staring back at us. That with a 66% percent with it. Yet that data can change.
  

  

  
  
  
  

  

  
  
  

So, what do they do when, despite the interpolations of latent space creating unique, create uniqueness? Now in our feeds? Like I see within Gossip Goblin?

Like these Chatgpt made ones? From the blog of John Harnup he covers

the facebook and reveals unique visions with the laten space other than the banal space. It's that small business want it and it's the standardisation now? GPT made this.

Well? Send him John Hartnup link, attempt to contact. Beyond the generalisation with our creativity as these become concept art and code within both Twitter and Bsky, I told you so. The tastless masses ought not to be condescended from the reactionary PMC or Artisan high status, only to be met below of it.

So that they can to the anti-realism fiction that resists copyright maxmilism like this.

That we move it out with the standardise ways of our education, it will be a reshuffle.

Ymmv.

As John Singer Sargents sloppy brushtrokes, they don't meet up with that! Natural kitsch, Artifice Kistch

No, That 95% is an orphaned statistic cheif, it isn't scholarship. That ain't right.
like 90% of the brain ain't used. THANKS MEDIA FOR PUBLISHING to confirm the priors of the presumptions of the audience!

(This is the amount I can show now.)

(Quotes from such I paid in substack.)

woops! Paywalled, well the next best source

nope, that's like (And I'm quoting honest reporting, don't accuse.) (Ymmv) Rob Wiblin with honest reporting, astroturf/incentivised behavior idc on that Inconvenient Truth.

My own refutation is gyms go with 5% success rate so that nebulous statistic.

Wow! Witch hunts! Neoliberal purity culture at it's finest, such a totality of contradictions—it's getting embarrassing malpractice, with misplaced understanding that's growing absurd.

It does not create brain rot and brain damage, Another bad publishing trip thanks to vertically integrated media and a moral panic industry complex.

Infinite thought too; consider the alternative.

This is videogame panic all over again, for moralist.

Those sound waves nope. Andy Masley covered it.

Oh and increased power consumption remains dubious and extends towards to MWURICas energy usage.  It expands to green energy.

• Oh, and Model Collapse, Aly codes has got with that.

"Autoregressive LLMs aren’t classifiers. They do work on probability distributions over given tokens, but classifiers are distinct. Hallucinations can arise from classification errors, but that’s more akin, ironically, to what is happening in Emily Young’s post (i.e. confabulating similar sounding concepts). 

Classification is not what’s happening at inference time for LLMs; these are distinct functions. Sampling randomness also isn’t what causes hallucinations. Deterministic decoding can still produce hallucinations.

I think I understand what you mean by “each gen reinforces the previous one’s biases”… but it should be clear this isn’t what is happening at inference time. Hallucinations previously in a prompt don’t necessarily mean hallucinations further down.

The VHS analogy seems to invoke model collapse. To be clear, training over certain limited distributions of data can absolutely produce gobbledygook, but that’s not limited to synthetic data; other things can cause distributional degradation, e.g. limited or somehow biased corpora.

Imagine small, isolated populations of animals. What tends to happen here over time is the shedding of alleles. Over time, populations become more, but not fully, homogenous. So model collapse can arise, e.g., by only training on a corpus that already has comparatively homogenous distributions.

The model collapse you invoke doesn’t happen over small scales of synthetic data. You would essentially have to replace the entire organic corpus of pre-training data with synthetic data, likely produced by the same LLM, to have this effect. The addition of synthetic data alone doesn’t suffice.

Consider it another way: how do you produce, say, a racist model? Ignoring reinforcement learning, the strategy would be to only train it on racially biased material, right? Except the problem here is that such a corpus would be way too small, and of a similar distribution.

This is one way (once again setting aside RL) that early Grok versions were… truly terrible. The biased distribution in the training data has a host of downstream effects completely unrelated to race. You’ll find unaligned, unpredictable behavior.

You’ll find that a model trained on racist data that only talks about black people in the context of crime has distorted relationships between concepts like crime, neighborhood, violence, names, cities, etc. And then there’s non-obvious skewing. Turns out biased distribution can make you bad at code.

That’s basically the same phenomenon as a model trained solely on synthetic data, at least in theory. But no one has any reason to only train on synthetic data. Synthetic data is supplementary in the corpus, and data selection is still a real process. Even LLM-assisted data is human-curated.

For context, research has found that preserving even only 10% of the original data in a model produced only very minor degradation. The scenario described in the original premise is not real, (un)fortunately (your choice)."

Links to openai and nature 

No, Glazing does not work. Arxiv by that.

Some YouTuber threw a clock study to disprove it; there's that here.

Recursive Self-Improvement?? Nah.

A developer Lossy  Along with other doubts

What about superIntelligence, I can't fully comment on that other than this article.

• Batteries are separate issue which is I advocate for green tech.
• Oh I quick aside to cybersecurity, there's my thoughts on that. Including bio risk.
• Oh Blame Copyright Maximalists for the book chopping even though base rate fallacy again. Inchoate baby.

Don't listen to Ed Zitron, IDK why he's got a book deal.

wow, ty for such erm, internet for giving me this bad technocritic

So we know this mwurican moral panic sucks right? An arbitrary polemic with OSS having there toy taken with the venture capitalists and the sloppy critical theorists disfunctioning at it?
Yet they move the goalposts with every moment, it used to be big pharma, big disney, and big tech now. Yet that leads into bad epistemology. Yet, I'm not saying you can't yet, a bad base is a bad base. Dogmatically so.

I can't control the winds and the weather of macro waves of sociological forces, though. It's not like they'll galvanise or radicalise bad epistemics of infinite regression.

👈🥅👈
There will always be vendors for those subsumed.

Sigh, there's an industry now. Even with my irenicism, I can

Only keep it quiet here.

From Aaron Tay who's doing academic research, hmm. Well, it's all that.

When all the baseless assumptions are left with nothing to cohere, I alter my perceptions to fit a new point of view of care into moderation. They not start call-outs/boycotts.

The performative, showmanship and ruthless of the bunch have been the vocal minority. Back before 1953, where it was uninvented by doxing and harassing with malpractice. Direct action! That malpractice is something I can't work with. Compare that reaction to the Sam Altman/Elon polemics to this.

Wow, Markov to 1920s. 

Look at medicine, weather prediction, and new avenues.. outside of the microblogging epistemic filter bubbles. Now we are here.

They're merely lost. No conflict theory is getting into pure idealism this is going. Oh a misplaced radicalism. Such as the revisionism of popular ideas online that get too much attention.

Such is the term of left from the 1800 of the bourgeoisie. Along with the way it's directed with the government. Such is the acien regime of today.

We will have to interpellate this epistemic tech, for no epistemology is sound under reactionary capital, yet adaptation we can survive to not be subservient to it. The regulation via the state will make the age verification tech look restrained. These second-order effects.

Tech, tool, medium whatever. It's getting rebranded I'll have to demand for it's irenicism (that will never happen) yet the reaction is broken; that's why I foundherently reject it. Since the smug left has adopted the presuppositionalist tactics from the cristian reactionary fundamentalists.

So, I beg you, don't continue this campaign and stop this hole you're digging in. If you're calling the doomers AI bros, what does that make you with proprietary DRM? Misrablist with the Class that's supposed to be a civil lawsuit.

This boycott will basically go nowhere given their broken radical roots, like Ron Paul supporters and men's rights activists; that's my prediction.

Another fundamental reactionary blip of response rates.

I may be fighting the long gone mobs myself, lest I
become a subject to this meme.

As I feel like I'm fighting of this catachism and refuses to die, like MRA did. LLM training is fair use/fair dealing and within the public intrest still.

Over the pointless polemics over Altman and Elon, I can't get behind this anti-tech polemics for the sake of it. We are going to have to re-strategise with understanding this while ignoring the provokers.

So, it's going to be anti-trust. Against the laws of censorship of copyright and odd anti-porn in order to win points for a privatised entity that's going. Good thing I'm going to self-publish. This has made me less radical and more of a sociological generalist in terms of allegiances for my campaigning for recognition.

(Oh and don't act like you've got a monopoly unless you go viral and get a Jeremy Clarkson endorsement.)

His response on a boycott (been deleted is also good)

"Just kill this naive bubble." Or, control the conversion rate/conversation

So then, they're putting humanism on there goods/services as if it's luxury, as if

Those lower from other countries are listening to how such shame structures operate.

You don't even have to use them to see this is going into a bad infinity of scepticism. 

Even the jesters of the world this a gag to bait.

fall for it every single time (Derogatory slur)

So he goes, in depths of the microblogging sphere as a digital cryptid.

(It's real btw, he got so much attention he minted a proof of stake Ethereum nft. Which is environment-friendly proof of stake. Rather than busywork.)

I'm starting to agree with this provocateur mememister.

So they will use it to bait the high status-seeking snobbishness out.
Insulting intellectuals' labour. LLM does not even need to be even a tool at this rate, all this bullying is too much.

Disney is an entertainment company mwurica, this is an academic explanation.

So with, with all the policy recommendations (Other than yimby green tech'n the like) I'm not sure They're right about Formal Verification'n such.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATCOR
Oh there was nitpick by an engineer so skip this since it's too technical for me.

I'm going to try to understand and share this blog post on that as a side-tangent.

There was also smart-glasses too. (Disney ain't going to protect you here either.) Unrelated.

UBInfinity, or even that of the way to avoid the PMC/artisan class calls to expand Copyright protection. There are furtive billionaires' all that.

And another bonus link of what to do with sociology by Nicolas D Villarreal. Of executive class dreams. That's a Marxist refutation

(bonus link.) Also my reading list As with all things, this is going to deal with anti-science murica left. So it's time to nationalise and away from private equity, and moral panic industry complex. Or heck, Even the Ai denialist industry complex. Heck though, It's got all the intellectuals and dummys like me in a twist.

At least I know I'm entertaining.

I'm going to go with programmers and others who happen to

Rely on the physical laws on this.

It's all gone into a culture war.

This is the Anti Ai trap of mobbishness and I'll quote.

"But the ranks of La Résistance (and the academics most attuned to it) too often default to mockery. AI is just “synthetic text extruding machines” and ridiculous poop analysis startups. Among the intelligentsia of the AI Resistance, there is too little serious engagement with the fact that the world’s most prominent mathematician is in real time, showing how AI will change mathematics forever. Or that agentic coding has changed how software developers work around the world, even though it only really started working last December. There is little acknowledgement that millions of people find LLMs profoundly useful.

And I’m sorry to break it to you, but AI is not a scam. There are scammy AI products, scammy AI startups, scammy AI evals, and scammy people trying to staple “AI” onto whatever they were already selling. But the underlying technology is real, and it will change the world.

A serious theory of resistance, therefore, cannot rest on pretending otherwise. You will not understand the impact of AI if you use only the free version of ChatGPT to call it “stupid”. If the current version of AI’s “Project” doesn’t sound appealing to society, I think it is our job to reshape it. But the current plot dismisses that there’s something fundamentally different about GenAI, in particular, LLMs. In the AI Con, Bender and Hanna “reject untestable ‘everything’ machines that are marketed as ‘general purpose technologies’. ” And instead say that we need ‘specific tools geared towards specific tasks.’ This is opposed to the empirical reality of machine learning, sometimes referred to as “the bitter lesson.” And sure, we should be serious about validating systems in the application layer — but pretending generality itself is a scam will not help us govern the technology we actually have."

Despite some sympathy, ideologically these may be the sentiments

as all the hoopla goes away.

The conservative mental model are tilting at windmills of futility of how capital operates with free-market perverse incentives

Liberal mental model is that it's a status game turned up to 11.

Dialectical communist mental model it's the Pied Piper making the Artisan class reactionary. Denying the productive forces for the petit-bourgies socialism as he said within German ideology.

Deontological will be you can't de-humanise yourself from mistreating the intrinsic justness welfare of a subject.

as all political stripes will see the fad of the lunch table.

This is to not to say tech can't have bad side and abuses. (Agriculture for one) Yet, I can't take this boycott/activism seriously anymore.

Irenicist I must go! To irenicsim, the denialism ends. Or it rests within the dank depths of social media technology.

Then nationalise this like Switzerland is doing, so regulation of the scienctists can begin, not the clowns.

And this Public Ai network

Welp, Murica with banning the internet archive still exist. Link

"We are afraid future actions could inadvertently or intentionally regulate or even ban open source, a much maligned and misunderstood topic in AI. That would be a grave mistake.

Open source – simply a process that allows technology to be shared, built, and distributed publicly and transparently – is safe, secure, and drives economic growth. More than 90% of the world’s software was already built on open source and produced more than 8 trillion dollars worth of economic benefits, long before AI entered the picture. Today, open source technology is quietly training, improving, deploying, and securing AI everywhere."

This natural language coding, along with its polysemy, will keep me irenic'n neutral. With all the VC, I kindly ask for you to consider this manifesto in cyberspace. To down the troll apologists

Please be more irenic and apathetic of the fanaticism.

Less derogatory slurs of the bros of microblog artist.

I cannot answer for the industry, especially on social media.

Stop drawing lines in the sand.

👇Nico's Gargoyle for dreams of peace.

Smbc

To conclude: This is the at its most hustle naivety.
It's all but a..

 COMPUTATIONAL SPECTACLE 🛋💣💥

The west believes in ENTERTAINMENT of partisan womps! Of big X that's hyper woke. non-partisan with copyright maxmilism!

To the others. 🇺🇸🇬🇧🇪🇺 So, we are going to ask, what's the point of the this polemic? It's nothing but artififace, the job replacement is fake. You can't outsource anthing with LLMS, please stop fighting. Work is more fun than fun, and make connections.

Free Systems qualitative study, where they noticed.

Notice where the attention goes, though. If the screen time Is it
of redistribution could be a comparative advantage of the wabi-sabi of it all.

"How can they be so postive?" Yimby? Well, People hate hollywood and now it's silcon valley since it's popular, yet now..

People hate hollywood and now it's silcon valley since it's popular, yet now..

China and open source to that: lol

Source: Free Systems and Politico and 2024 ips
It's our responsibility, Over the acien regime

So they bleed in right wing-attitudes drip drip albert mach Frei; of reactionary IP high-status

Why do I owe you all of this? Why am I responsible?

Why? With this rejection of a polemic of pro-anti hegelian now needed when we must express curiosity to our coming age. To be with the means of the production. BE NORMAL. I go all the way to f___ a couch so you don't have to.

Or not, I'm an aesthetic anti-realist, as a anti-normative naturalist, I can't control the noise outside this blog. Only it so pointless and another hurdle within this line of work, not theft work, or imperative work, merely, work.

I doubt this will be futile due to the ritual hatred and the trolls with this being a busybody post, it's okay though, I accept that. Only I recommend you to avoid this negative preference cascade before it's too late.

Well, this is likely not going to talk shop, I can give them this. Or why I don't debate such a polemic. Unserious!

2. Side note, I haven't used AI in this, merely my natural cognitions and critical

thinking skills to look at the west.

- LA RESISTANCE -

End!   💪🛋🌈

Research of books and my epilogue after this. Oh that descent came for a tutorial shared by Seth Godin on IBM that 1


Slide from the a French techno company. 2 hours it's got politics all over it (what do you expect under an editorial.)

So I must go, into cyberethics.

,,,