Skip Navigation

lacaio 🇧🇷🏴‍☠️🇸🇴

@ obbeel @lemmy.eco.br

Posts
12
Comments
121
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Remote computing is very expensive. It's just the gated (owned by companies) LLMs that are cheap for the final consumer. Training a 2b LLM on remote compute will cost thousands of dollars if you try to.

  • bullies!

  • Palantir only cares about one philosophy. The "philosophy of God". You may like some enlightenment figures like Kant or Leibniz, since the sense of hierarchy is powerful on the epoch, but that's about it. You're supposed to reverb/echo the "philosophy of God" or get out! Critical thinking without hierarchical thinking is just a pain on the ass for them, so you can "go home and eat our metaphysical shit" or submit to the Mathematical God which will create all the rules and philosophy we need.

    I guess that's what he means.

  • Incredible pictures!

  • Back in the early 20th century, companies needed licensing, would sell their product nationally. They were on the toolbelt of the government. Now companies are global and they are the ones who choose government; they don't even sell anything tangible anymore. They just say: "Let's organize to build these lot of datacenters, we'll organize it for you.", and they do it worldwide. No need to bring in value, they're just "politicians without borders".

  • You need a static IP address and DNS. Then you need to follow instructions for launching and administrating the lemmy server online: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy

  • What do you want to self-host? Lemmy?

  • Well, it's weird that it gets 16%

  • You're giving Microsoft too much credit. The market in general doesn't want you to think of an alternative.

  • I treat my mind as a big great block. If something is disturbing me, I stop to put everything into place and move "all together" again. It works and I'm more productive this way.

  • I think for the big apps like Whatsapp and Facebook it makes sense that the companies want to hide the features that give users control beyond the "standard" way of using the app in places where they cannot find it.

  • Fear of Small Numbers, by Arjun Appadurai

  • The article criticized the closing of the Internet by Tehran, but the Internet is clear vulnerability that can be exploited in times of war.

  • The article has its ups and downs. Mostly downs.

  • Don't make me believe this is the kind of talk that's going on Twitter.

  • Onboard the train to dystopia.

  • AI is a modern problem, getting rid of negative traits is a potential problem. Getting rid of negative traits incur that something about the person or being is a disorder. That could be schizophrenia or autism, that are more considered like problems, even though these are problems that are at the core of society, not problems with the people themselves. Getting rid of these might seem logical, but they also meddle with what a person is at its core. Now moving on to things that are more accepted by the literature as non deviant genetic 'traits' would be homosexuality and transness. What if this defiant and deviant mode of living was to be erased by genetic modification? I'm sure the parents would be proud, but you just got rid of something that is at the core of what that person is. That is against diversity by itself. Genetic modification in the sense of eugenics or getting rid of negative traits is the same as eliminating diversity and difference, which is why Hitler picked at it so much.

    I'll elaborate even more: Arjun Appadurai implies at his "Fear of Small Numbers" that at the core of eliminating difference there is a deep desire for oneness. That those who are different are such small steps away from complete oneness and national identity. That is, I exist in the society which I identify as real, and anything against that is so close to inexistant that I could just wipe them out and be in my happy place. So close to it, but not quite. Something that Appadurai calls the state of "incompleteness".

  • If there is no proper definition for what IQ is, it's just another fallacy for normative thought. I mean by this that going through classical logic seamlessly does not incur into intelligence, even though it might incur into intellectual fitness. And then it's all again why we have a certain model of thought of what is considered normal. This needs to exist if we are to assert "Intellectual Quality".

    Now, if we assert what is "normal" we also have to assert what is a "disorder" or "deviance", which is what's treated as "dumbness" here. If it is a desired "heritable" quality, that means to be included or fit to the current intellectual state.

    Next to relate as to why I have compared this to the AI results. AI could predict race based on X-rays - but that means as much as IQ being heritable. A normative study for normative thought with no valid conclusions using formal logic as an excuse.