Inexorable Fall The reckoning with the falling rate of profit

Ah, Nicolas

We are in a semotic world, of non-symbolic to meaning proliferation. We are within the linguistic meshes of today.

This signals to the middle class alienation and the way technology comes from the lonliness angle, quoting althusser and other modern sociologists in a quest to understand and see where the rate of profit will fall.

Even if wrong, the entertainment industry itself with the spectacle and way it operates brings the ideas of our loneliness of the middle class revolutionary potential now in the era of ideas of our coming epoch. So that with that way of suburban sprawl that our own ideas.

Then there is the delusion meshes we cohere our web of ideas together into a sense of suttonesque village view into the world of others as they way the techno capitalists have calculated ways to provide a lone experience to the outside world, even though that naughty liberal Andy thinks otherwise.

I do feel that loneliness though, as with all these times moving into this coming epoch of more view of a social society as the cultural tech seeps and moves into everything, and how little circles of microblogs to community's of expression of the 'third place' or our right the city, it the radical planning he proposes with moving from the professional class and the middle class like myself as a revolutionary class, to programmer to artisan to one.

Of course, this fledgling programmer in his attempt to build the foundherent bridge (i'm using haackian epistemology.) To build another a mess of crossword intersection, it's all the way that it brings insight.

Slight nit-pick, I'd like more bullet points. for the punch, ty.

Beyond Bwubbles, Onto new analogy

🔮🛋

Update, there's a bubble discourse with this. As there are too many cooks.

Oh, don't forget that comment.
This everything is so fast with the concept of the bubble coming in 2022, I've decided to move on with a new state of economic transformation in iterations. Something that IDK what is happening

• Ed zitron. As far from the rumours that the bubbles got the pop with embarrassments, and with his news later, which I have no influence over along with no kinship. OOOPS well he's wrong thanks Ben Garrison.

• Peter Thiel and Mark Anderson and the and copyrighting have taken a different approach to the bubble, saying it's going to lead to abundance, said whole Boomer, utopia of some kind well, or something idealistic of that nature. Nah. (nope) 

• The concept artists themselves fake-believing with the copyright nuke. Think that the bubble will just automatically extinguish, including there employer Disney. Itself into a world of ultimate peace, it's still long going, it's getting more tropeish and predictable by the second, ignored in the low Tier. On that corners of the microblogs that's where it will exist.

• The YOU WILL LOOK SO INCOMPETANT WHEN IT POPS DUMMY by one of the intellectuals on substack I quoted on substack on cloaster. Nah, one poster came as supremacist. Idk something else. It felt like more a showboat rather than a manner to like it. (Post edit, he's went 180 and hates it too with the job annihilation job disappointment,)
  
  
  
  

  
  Oh yeah, the predominant 'left' also predicted that with niche
  Bitcoin, look how that turned out. I already covered it here.

The most plausible from a solitary cautious optimist, through the different variations, that there's going to be a quiet revolution of academics and other thing that is the one that feels the most plausible bubble right at this moment. Quiet with agile firms.

What if it's not a bubble yet? Other self reconstructing Bridgestone? The llm compatibilism.

One trying to reconstruct and build together once with each new filter list with each block and reconnection of construction. Blocks and discovery's from the connectionist substrate, to the reconfig an return and overlook of the relation of elite and popular, and the return to a natural duty.

When that comes, it's a matter to reunite and see which from the commodified community's that are made, it's the populist de-emergence of the matter of the integration of society.

So as a left accerationist it's going to be this meme

Back to the equilibrium, from a synthesis of many and one.

What foxkey is claiming there's an illogical bubble? Idk.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/the-all-or-nothing-vibe-shifts-of-the-ai-industry.html
Oh, blame the Hypers too. Good, bad. or not, Archive version

Conclude @pojmasta done his work,

Using the pretentions of labor protection horrible things

 That Sarah Case was like react world in a fancier package, enough racketeering.

Conciousness, the beep boop documentary, into the rabbit_hole

My oddest radical opinion on augmentative consciousness. (Completely interpretationist and have disagreements and falsifiability with that Karl Popperian jazz.) Not suited for microbloggers

Wow.

Do they even think of these questions on the highway road of microbloggers? 

This documentary.

Commit to anatta (Buddha non-self) with all presuppositions wiped clean.

Then watch. You know where I am.

Why, with the crop of free Beep_boop documentaries, there are more to choose from with all these questions. I doubt the commodity hustler outside here will have the time to understand that question. They are in their own circles of relations.

Even when it blames 

These questions of absolute epistemic certainty with consciousness require serious thought, though, and it's bled into my artwork.

Even when I don't directly use it

Has anyone seriously thought of consciousness before?

Still updating my main essay investigation

Spellings applied; I've been on Substack and rabbit holes like a veteran. 🛋🌃

with more doodle-core gags. Despite the fact they may hate this as well. No winning from proprietarian dominion, I suppose.

 Memetic a go go for curiosity bait..

For my hobby, critical theory? I got two pieces of feedback from literature/sociology. That's cool. Getting disquistions and essaykins back. Including the bottom right.

Free read > 🛋👉 3rd version off you can see the bottom right of all the indie knowledge work. Sceptics are welcome except for propertarians.

I'm still working on version 3, so other feedback and second opinions are welcome.

If I can't deliver the impact in video essay format on YouTube, then I'll be alright here. It's not like the reach there may be shared.

So bye-bye, propertarians! 👏🛋 Not falling down that rabbit hole. Will help guide those who are interested.

Oh, looking at me?? I'm merely a couch himbo thinking this out! 🛋👈⭐

Convienient eristics heuristics; The Commercial metrology trap

Once you see algorithms develop, you'll see how they think, through philosophy of mind.

You cannot unsee.

There monotizing meterolgy. The connectionism, then the grissere of a metaphysical labour, to the unpaid labor.

Prosumer metrology: On the The Eye Of the Master.

Even with the general intelligence being a category error, I'll give you that. That's a good examination of the Beep Boop using the labour theory of value that's within good faith.

We know it's eliminative all the way down with funnel metrics, and the e-begging and the coherency are brought and sought by many minds.

Yet what of the experience of Taylorism and measurement of the manner in which the mindset is employed? The meaning completely changes within the connectionism of the market, which is already a generalised construct within the internet, and which you participate in.

It's abstraction, an abstraction of our labour for all your labour lovers out there.

Well done for blowing my mind with the grissiere and abstract labour, from which we build ideas from the corpus of knowledge that we dialectically, positively and negatively construe of the dreams of the perceptron and all these mechanical terms that make your living mind think.

Yet a dialect aside, even a negative dialectic (as the Frankfurters would go) will happen to go.

Oh how our internet has made us into commodified communities as a mentally salient sorting mechanism in order not to lose ourselves from the delusion, even beyond the general intelligence as it's defined now.

It's specialised ain't it? Apart from that disagreement, five stars.

Woke 2 ain't happening, back to traditional queer theory.

 No, I'm not part of it, outgrown my 20's now.

Yet there those eho do anti-social , elitist, or selling out of criticsl theory.

Oh, 1dime on anti-social adventurism ain't praxis. Theres alsi refutations too such as the cubs gay marches as queer theory advocates who go for there rights. Yet this is the problem of perect coherency, its always messy, sometime obscure, somtimes obvious.

Case by case.

Guess with the campism, then theres no perfect coherency, as with social media, as with the ways llms effect us.

That's what it takes to be a sociologistp

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*