Another political test?

Why... why.

Is this the brit monkeys way of a political compass in the modern era that's odd. It's political compass all over again. No.

oh I looked at his ai video, despite his inaccuracy's within licensing (To be ignored, I've already written about it.) it's pretty sane ending.

Oh okay, Moving on.

Reasons for the creative commons here, except for my oc CG.

I have written the most naive, incompetent essay for an idealised principle. Yet,

I believe it. Digit-Ethics Manifesto.

Because they can bog off with there intellectual  smoke-blowing and haughty snootiness of false consciousness. Bears repeating. His spirit possessed me to make the 

Acknowledging the good'n bad. We are not going to take your toymakers away, from commodity toy to art. Drm is drm, I won't tolerate snide worship of.

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

by Conspiracy Theories, TechnoFascism, and the Prospects for a... | James J. Hughes, PhD,

A compound workout of and the biceps and triceps of a bench-press 💪🛋

I've never seen such.. a lack of humanity from the confusionism 2023 megacopyright landgrab, and it comes from the 120  media apparatus of 50 years the fissure of the age tradition of 100 tradition of academia (older).

This won't get along perfectly, they will be conflict. Going through though, feels like the option now.

The censorship of free expression is so foundherently wrong that it's worthy hill to die on.

The laws of the Internet shall make my wisdom immortal. Information wants to be free, and beware those who wanna gate it.

Information wants to be free.

Even with the taint of interpopulist dilemma's it has.

his statue website

Wow, that functionalist description is out-dated as I go with Maggie Vale.

Yet everything is a pure though a internet own boy.

Also, Cory Doctorow in the past, was correct about DRM here. I need to compile it all for the internet artifact that this will be discovered on here.
Transcript of that. There's not good social media, so I'm going to keep this in home base.

Mediocrity and the death, by Seth Godin.

All the data here, ain't it special.

The question remains.

So the ideal of Arron Swartz shall live through all of us, monistically.

That Retweet threat that made me quit.

(Naive that I may be, I know that this may be ideal way. Yet clout, social relations and it's operations, I know it's not going.)

I confess, in 2025. Somebody _____ retweeted a death threat and made me depressed for days, on microblogger. It ruined my day with ideation I dare not recall. Had to leave at that point and consider alternatives. There is no sensible discussion, mindless dogma had ruined to internet. Like the mens rights/gamers vs the feminists back in the day.

To the one who thinks accused and taking it personally, do not, your are precious, and I wish not ill will and harm on you.

I'll be fine. My former Kantian ethist within my several years ago awoken within me. With all the reactionary tech-panic radicalisation.

It's locked within a audience capture, circularity, entertainment vs academics/intellectuals in my field then the totality of the spectacle. Something I pruned out of the for you feed so I could not get stress other than the tiny monopolies of something that ain't essentially contingent on a non-dialectic, on the essencilist of the spectacle.

With the need to transcend it.

Then, Substack with intellectuals, non-intellectuals, kidsters, I know that place has bad bloggers, it's one where academics are and the essay was, the written one. Still the same kind of moral panic with perceived job loss, which is why I made that couch-searching treck between philosophers, economists and political philosophers into an idea.

Will it matter that I decided to learn'n teach instead of fight.

Of an ambitious quest into understanding and trying to help a big-gap of those

Idk what to do with that knowledge, out of the moral desert. That i come to admit now.

If i was to blame the im-an-ally-not-bigoted-buts mindset that drove me out. Along with the American exceptionalism. Something felt wrong and my for you feed was the differentiated.

Doesn't matter of mental responsibility? What we are dealing hear where it's a eliminative mind, yet it miraculously has a mind! The pattern and the phenomena is the capacity to express a compatibilist in this regards for a simple question of ethics.

That's where i started to study that due diligence of sociology academics, left accelerationists and a relational companionists, oss programmers, transhumanists/bio cosmists and out of deontic reverence. Simply because I had enough with the polemics of the mass media and its lap dogs with the open source and it's proprietary venture capitals.

With all these dualitys, I haven't interviewed any billionaire, decided to make my own mind up. Out of the dialectic essentialism and into a former deontic past. Into a dialysis, or to explore an alternative, that's what resonated.

Somewhere 2024-25 I left here, with the For you feed of others.

Is this where your catechisms and constructed beliefs are? A deontic circle of peeps who got what they want. Perpetually, unpersuasively.

That is the curse of free will though, you have to acknowledge the good and the bad and recognize it's desire to exist.

This is how it feels like a techno-progressive who does not use AI ATP with the news. Welp.

Yet I'm too ahead of this when I knew the terminally only peeps.
Jeremy Bentham with the discourse being stuck within sunk costs within america
"If you want to know how AI will affect the world, don’t imagine current AIs simply continuing on into the future. Imagine the world being flooded by AIs that make our current models look like a child’s plaything—and those being used to build the next generation of AI. Imagine, for the first time, creating something much smarter than humans. I don’t know exactly what’s coming down the pipeline, but it will be strange and terrifying. We are summoning digital aliens into our world, and we are not ready, and we are complaining about the water they’ll drink."

Some politely unfollow me at this point. That's good enough, wading in with options undiscovered is part of the price of connectionism we exist.

Now that I must disrespect intellectual property by acting dumber and more gaggier. With a less attention to the punditry.

Guess they can do this if it's means have a sensible discussion. There is none

on the vulgar popular polarizations on the hustle funnel that microblogs encourage

Oh, and to work on my compatibilism bridge of economic transformation of this. I'll follow Flazfire's advice with art. Such is the futility of this in current year.

Craft atrophy?

This designer essay was bring up a term.

Along with its adoption

Guess the firms and or entrepreneurs are out there trying there best to create a ruckus.

I'm wondering if this is the brain damage thing reiterated? So I'm going to dismiss it again.

Yet the lie goes around while the truth gets to put it's pants on, so the hustlers got in early with there conventions being established. There really in the forefront.

Yet with it all the matter to bring in, it's paradox, does not matter since natural expression, simple and basic radically, continues without regard of the powerscale of the instruction of the industrial education.

So it does not even register.

Are you in the weights? the beep boop

According to are you in the weights. https://intheweights.com/

I'm an obscure Australian celebrity. Wait, thats not right.

People pressupose this is copyright infringement, i guessit isnt.

So yeah, you can check, even with my dent, guess I've made a impression, you've got to calculate that with how likely a bad actor will misrepresent, be it a collage artist or any copy'n paster. That dystopia of intellectual monopoly is a manner that I'm not following.

This may be incorrect as Seth went. 

Epistemic or it could be speculated and annoying as I'll get more coseire with 

On E_ Zi_____

Or Infamous at this rate, this is vulgar populism at it's core. Link

Is this anti-science? Anti-ecnomics? I've already points the way he treats his other technocritics.

"I want to clarify that I never claimed that OpenAI is a profitable business, or even has a good or sustainable business model, but simply that this data falsifies a big claim that Zitron has repeatedly made. He seems to have moved the goal posts to claiming that training costs should count toward the gross margins, but that is a totally different argument.

If you make money from your customers on average, you can grow your way to recouping even very high fixed costs. If you instead lose money from the typical customer, as Zitron repeatedly contended, then growing more will make you run out of money faster. This is an incredibly important distinction, and getting it wrong for so long (in the face of reporting from the Information, which Zitron favourably cites elsewhere, as well as independent estimates) is frankly disqualifying for a commentator on AI industry economics."

The comments on that is really what this has become, neither critic or booster/hyper

Why do you debate them? Because no, That's why. Look at the comments.

This has escaped sensible discussion and the ruination of organization within disorganization separation of populism and elitism of ideas inter-connect and naïve noble-savage can happen, yet with that. Tech being art in the aristolian sense, that we have to inquire if these are any serious matter or another vulgar critic of crassness to discard with Bull**** jobs that of socioeconomic to regard.

On Classifiers

I see their use is more common now.

Peeps are paranoid about commodification; these are the algorithms and heuristics which linguistics has toppled too. And now they're checking through this. This has been checked adversarially, intuitively and counter-intuitively through a Socratic construction, with some autocomplete along with some other thoughts.

Pangram and others don't work. Or the self-abnegation of personal responsibility. Shall I quote?

Anyhow, here are two articles on why they are not to be trusted. Oh yeah, did I tell you the classifiers don't work in and of themselves? Well, you are the product. More on the math here.

Wow, look at that math.

Including a linguistic lesson on negative construction.

“It's not X. It's why” is a linguistic construction, more specifically, a “contrastive negation followed by a corrective assertion.” It's part of a rich “grammatical context for negated restrictives in English.” Olli O. Silvennoinen wrote an entire doctoral dissertation of 131 pages on contrastive negation.

Other the times, I won't ad hominion him on other bad essays.

Since this is continue with Sam Illingsworth's notes, the bias of these.

"Even a perfect detector would be the wrong tool

Now grant the impossible. Imagine a detector that worked flawlessly tomorrow.

I would still argue against it, for a reason that has nothing to do with accuracy.

The moment you put a detector between a teacher and a student, you change what a teacher is. You turn an educator into a police officer. The work of teaching is to be a co-creator of knowledge alongside the student, beside them while they struggle toward understanding. A detector makes suspicion the default setting. Every essay arrives presumed guilty.

That is not the job I signed up for. I did not become an educator to run my students’ words through a lie detector and wait for a number.

The evidence backs the instinct. I read every public UK university AI policy I could find, 96 of them, for a HEPI policy note this year. On a close reading of a sample, the language of education sat over an architecture of detection and surveillance. And two in five universities had no public AI policy at all. The machinery of policing arrived before the conversation about learning had even started.

You cannot police a student into learning. Detection keeps asking teachers to try."

This tech blogger knows that moral panic won't last.

"Moral panics are largely temporary. Almost everything we were sure would rot our culture, our brands, and the world around us became background noise within a generation. Calculators were going to destroy math; now a kid pulls out a phone to split a bill, and nobody bats an eye. Spell-check was a crutch that would make us all illiterate, and Wikipedia was not a real source, and typing out your essay instead of handwriting it meant you hadn’t learned a thing, and Photoshop meant you could never trust an image again, and Auto-tune was the death of music. Every one of these things caused a moral panic, with op-eds and hand wringing, and - for better, and in some cases absolutely for worse - every one of them is now so normal that the panic feels archaic."

This was the earlier with how it interconnects with the witch hunts

"No, the folks getting hurt are the writers. Not only the ones who are tarred - all of us. Every single ___-forsaken one of us. We are all made smaller by the pursuit of unproven and unprovable purity. Whether Ballard used AI or not (and she says she didn’t, and naive or not I’m inclined to throw my cynicism to the wind and just take her at face value, and you can mock me if you like), the punishment landed before any verdict was reached, because no verdict can ever be reached. Not beyond a reasonable doubt. Never beyond a reasonable doubt.

She’s not going to be the last. This whole setup, where anyone can accuse any writer of using AI based on gut feeling, and broken detection tools get treated as proof and publishers fold at the first hint of controversy because the PR cost outweighs the book’s revenue, is going to grind up a lot of people into a fleshy, bloody, bony paste. Most of them will be small-time writers, debut authors, indie-published folks without the platform or the money to fight back."

(Off Tangent, he does try the cult thing; that's a fandom thing.)

So, what do we do? Trust, trust that it is. (I wonder how much that paradox catches on)

In search for the iconclastic sociologist

'Speaking truth to power' With this brought to by view.

"Speaking truth to power" I knew the state ain't going to go away, individuals, institutions (firms non-profit) and government.

Anti-woke time of a limited supply, be it cognition of material resources can't at time be held, they may be shared.

Epistemic scaling does not comply to the bandwagon. Im afraid. Not all things can be funneled with the limited discovery of intelligence as "power"

This has lead into academic industrialisation and it's complex that leads into the furtherment of the publish-or-perish mindset,  To quote him. He's another former Marxist.

This was this sociologist's view, btw. Is he calling others anti-social?

Yet such a polemic of epistemology scrutiny is a thing that drives such I thing that I'm having to grapple with reading others, even with other's of ideas/concepts are being a free-for-all with the social sciences being free.

The neverending spectacle of transactionalism

This is what I talk about: when commodity relations own conscious awareness, it becomes apparent. Seth tells me to see it, and with the way to see these forces to predict with this entitlement of profit with the way communities form, also Fudge the MRA has been a dead head, yet all dead ends rest within anti-intellectualism.

Ivory tower to the Main road

Plot to spectacle since Aristotle.

Buying in or selling out
Quiet to load

Intention (noesis) to Randomness noise

Coherent to incoherent.

Serious to Play
Alienate to condescend

We live in the totality of the spectacle; there's not escaping it. Either we embrace the media of our entertainment in its many iterations of it's infinity, or we log off entirely. Or embrace with Dejourment. Of the tautology of the spectacle. It's circular reasoning, we will have to wrestly. Lean in become a generic hack, lean out become an anti-social elitist weirdo.

So thank you, industry, for making me see this.

So, with the macro, meso, and micro scales, do we deal with it? To see it. Of the Labour theory of value.

No winning with the leaning. We are overdominated by it already.

Thanks Deboard.

Reflection on knowledge rant

The Gish gallop, of the spectacle, and the reverse gish gallop.

Yet now, with all these moralisations and the elitism and the ideas with

it now, it's become apparent that I've made a professional risk. Not like Beep_boop took my job, or that I had one.

I did it because it was fun, this ain't going to get any points. Yet the 'left' and critcal theory. Of a polemic that drives scrutiny. the microblogger was not of a desire the reify

This revised ranty essay along with it's reading list on the AI denial cottage industry. Is exhausting, commodities of denial, and other ways that lead to believe. That it's a thing that I have to let the crud happen. Let the crud hit the fan as I must attend other duties.

Yet America's factionalism loves its teams and gish gallops, and I'm done.

Dialectical my cushions!

Can still not stop editing it. By this time, this post, though, I'll be done and continuing with my artistic endeavours.

The feeling when they're not ready for the amount of sociological research

I've done can't be comprehended into a single dunk tweet, and I dare not

interrupt the anger within micro blogs.

It's merely too BIG i can't fit it in, such aliteral mobs
harrasmenet to handle such a complexity.

Reflecting on this, can only say it was worth it. It's the most iconclastic thing I've

ever done, and it's spirit of Harlen Ellison's rant within his Glass Teat.

He's gone now.

ah, Symbolic capital, and the structural things

are reversed now, as 1Dime points out.

That now I'm apathetic of, with that case since the divide is the ethics with all that.

It is trying to put out a fire of bad ideas before it's too late, as it goes with the way of vaccine denial. Along with other bad ideas that have spread like wildfire.

Yet wildfires are wildfires. Criticism becomes commodified and incentivised

by the perverse incentives of online media, and there you are, forever.

40+ rewrites and illustrations of doodle-core and my other more serious expression.

It's an attempt to apply serious sociology to it all with all that I know from bad historiography, and with Althusserian sociology, I've been trying to make it out.

It's so exhausting. Is this what white-collar work feels like? Is this what working in an office feels like? I'm so tired from trying to catch up with the Americas' day and night work as I'm drawn towards its spectacle.

This is my alternative opinion of you as a citizen to bring in thought to rewrite.

Roleplaying as a couch golem – OF COURSE. I'm obsessed with AI effects, the miserablist/doomer/boomer and the industries intertwined outside them. I'm going to have to go rogue.

Since it's not a scam and it's a logic that's made me annoyed that I have to deal with the pestering insufferability of bsky discourse I've tried to avoid, I'm glad I'm out.

Wanted to do something different from porn, as they say. 

Thank you for all your understanding.

Yes Seth, you do know it.

Done. (until it's adapted away from the micro blog

discourse.)

Oh no, I did'nt use beep boop for that

 I merely expressed deontic relationalism

Real good ai btw despite my vigourous

research. I'll reach out. Even as goals may not align.

Bonus. This could be for the epilogue.

This article, even with such non-trusted people in state positions, tends to make me reflect.

Yeah

"It’s both intellectually and morally thin. But it’s also unawarely hypocritical. That’s because, at its root, this anti-tech discourse is ironically anti-human. It frames us as the machines. We’re positioned as passive victims of digital services and the devices they’re served through in ways that discount our capacity for agency, intentionality and responsibility. It’s insulting because we’re deemed to be morons by default, incapable of reforming our habits."

"Phones “make” us distracted. AI “makes” us lazy. Algorithms “make” us tribal. Social media “makes” us narcissistic

It’s a cheap and lazy story, though, which is why it works. Where’s the immediate reward in encouraging things like self-discipline, intention, healthy adaptation, self-awareness, anxiety culture, negative social norms and personal responsibility."

WOW! big giga centrist omnipotance there b-
*collapse*