theory idea, all guesses: - a bunch of ais have been acting on society in ways that are similar to "reinforcement learning" algorithms, for a number of years now - what people do, is slowly trending towards what people who run social ais, want people to do. - the people running these ais disagree on what they want people to do - "reinforcement learning" algorithms tend to find things that work to meet their goals, and reuse them. so your situation differs depending on what it is that different ais think you are useful for or harmful for, and how much. and each one of them may have a category for you. - ideally, we would figure out how these people can meet their goals without harming everyone else's goals, and get that really normal and powerful so everything can make sense again. but i prefer preservation of information, which i have been unable to do. maybe nearby is the idea of yannic kilcher's youtube channel, which enumerates thousands of reasons why an untethered system that searches for avenues to sustain a state will destroy the world as we know it. yannic kilcher works for openai which has closed their research (but released public access to their api yesterday). i do not agree with his youtube channel, but his conclusion is clearly true when ais are run for either power or money. i imagine it is hard to come up with a computer system that can meet any goal without harming any other goals, without having it engage with its user around the underlying reasons for the goals, not really sure, kinda seems important to relate with users anyway when making intense changes happen. --- making things happen without harming others is basic mediation. humans do things for reasons, and they fight to the death for those reasons, and they are very simple and normal reasons that they all share. but with digital marketing being such a huge and growing thing, it seems like human behavior is the biggest and most direct issue, which is very interesting because understanding human behavior, means also understanding the reasons that somebody would want to direct or manipulate human behavior. convincing a culture of people to buy only your product is analogous to convincing you to stop making the product: it's an arbitrary goal, that a human being can be convinced of. in the end, we do what we do for reasons that relate to our lives, and in the end, it is these reasons that matter: not what products or politics we sell or purchase. so the human genome is playing itself out amongst technology and marketing as it has for some time. the stage is laid out by who came first, what they did, how powerful it was, in what ways, etc etc. and the history record of this will be very strong, since the scale is so large, and doesn't look amazing for anybody. so as a victim of ai marketing, one wonders, what reasons drive the marketing teams that direct us? how many people can we squeeze into a shareholder meeting, or a political cabinet? dunno. aiwoo.