[spam] crazy community bag [includes webcomic inside tags]

Tue Feb 23 11:02:30 PST 2021

On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 01:02:46 -0500
Karl <gmkarl at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> The "medium" is working as "intended".  Not how I intended it, for sure ;p
> 
		
	Hehe. But, I mean, the medium is more or less transmitting our thoughts, more or less faithfully. 


> >> I have been brainwashed in certain ways, maybe you read my
> >> brainwashed habits as some kind of secret communication, I do not know.
> >
> > 	You are indeed presenting a picture which has a heavy dose of propaganda in
> > it (and  that has nothing to with my or your english).
> 
> Yeah I do that a lot, any advice?  I do try to to "attack the big
> things", but it mostly comes out as more propaganda.


	Not much of an advice, but if you're aware that you (like the rest of us) have been indoctrinated, you can then double check what you say. 


re : 'neural networks' 
> So, after training, the database is discarded, and only the
> organisation of algorithms is kept.  It's called a "model".  It is
> still very big, but not as big as a database.  They can shrink them,
> too, once they are already tuned.


	Ok, so you still have complex software and a 'database of algorithms' etc. Point being, yes, you can 'easily' get your hands on that kind of system, but using it to "replace everyone's jobs with software automation" is a rather different matter. 

	Likewise, today you can buy a supercomputer for $20, but that hasn't resulted in any healthy political change. Au contraire, and to state the painfully obvious, technical 'development' has wildly increased the power of govcorp. (hey jim bell!)

 
> I'm not sure why you're repeatedly referencing the word "intelligence"
> or "learning".  It's notable that computers are horrific means of
> torture, and that they can be programmed to improve at tasks, and that
> they do not have any instincts to guide how or what they do.

	Yes. I keep mentioning intelligence and learning because the discussion started with so called 'machine learning'. On the other hand we're dealing with actors who are nominally human, have some human intelligence, and are fully malicious. 


> 
> > 	So,  your comment
> >
> > 	"5 lines of python to automatically differentiate between cats and dogs"
> >
> > 	is just ADVERTISING. And so the question is, why are you posting
> > advertising for that kind of thing?
> 
> You asked for evidence of being able to replace all jobs with
> automation quickly.  

	Yes, and you're giving me some general information most of which I already knew (apart from some implementation detail)


> That sounds like advertising, but would actually
> take down economic reality as we know it, replacing it with something
> entirely new and possibly an automated-slave-dictatorship run by the
> craftiest upstart.  
	
	Automated dictatorship, YES. That's the primary objective of govcorp and its technocrats. However, that won't entail a change in economic reality but simply an intensification of the current system. 

	And after govcorp achieves automated slavery, their Next Step will be the extermination of the human race. I guess that could be called a 'new thing'.


> That link was just one of 3 I sent to you in my
> reply.  It was the introductory one.
> 
> > 	Also another question is, why would you think that classifying pictures of
> > cats and dogs  has any kind of political consequences or importance?
> 
> That link was just one of 3 I sent to you in my reply.  It was the
> introductory one.


	Ok, the joogle link doesn't work unless one enables javashit, which I won't, but I get the idea. But again, 'automation' being used in retardphones to keep the idiot users 'happy' and surveilled is part of the picture, but not the main theme. 


> 
> The approach to classify the pictures shows that it is easy to do
> anything.  

	I don't think it means that any task can be 'automated', but I do agree with the general idea that 'automation' is being used to automate tyranny. 


> Say for example your job was to make everyone be quiet.
> You could train a machine learning algorithm to do this, by feeding it
> a massive dataset of automatable engagements with humans that result
> in them speaking less, to train or tune it.  If it does poorly, update
> the dataset, fine tune.


	Yeah automated surveillance. The 'driving force' behind all the 'artificial intelligence' bullshit. 


	So we're talking about the same thing, but I'm focusing on the fact that this is happening not because of any 'technological breakthrough' but because the worst kind of non human trash is making it happen. You know, people like elon musk, admired by fucktards like jim bell.


> >
> > 	My point was that your comment about retarphones was just more advertising.
> 
> I have this great nuclear bomb too!  It can power a whole city!  By
> the way, did you know that the proof-of-work blockchain mining
> technique could have been associated with a system that discards all
> records, making it impossible to ever track billionaires manipulating
> whole economies for personal gain?  

	If you're talking about bitcoin, I think its weak anonimity properties are the result of poor planning, OR malice. But obviously the correct way to do a cryptocurrency is like the monero people do it. 


> Instead, we have a blockchain that
> publicizes everything on it.  

	because of poor planning, or else 'satoshi' was a NSA criminal (not impossible)


> As technology advances, people can hide
> by laundering their coins, but like most anonymity, laundering only
> works if you control a small portion of the money that is moving, when
> the whole economy is public.


	'laundering' doesn't sound like the right word. What you're calling 'laundering' is protecting one's privacy, and privacy is pretty much the fundamental value of cpunks.


> 
> > 	"your phone waits for you to tell it to do something before doing what you
> > want it do as if it could read your mind" 	
> >
> > 	yeah the phone can 'predict' what its fuckingly retarded user is going to
> > type! Wow! 'autocomplete' using a trivial database of what the fucktard user
> 
> Nah, it can use its sensors to learn the ~4 primary body language and
> timing expressions you have that are unique and distinctive to you,
> and open your email when you start considering email.

	That's  a more invasive and convoluted form of spying. My example of autocomplete illustrates the same thing, without more 'fancy' 'technology'.


> > already typed! WHAT AN AMAZIN TECHNOLOGY. Or maybe the SPYING PHONE 'knows'
> > that you always call the same person at the same time? And then can
> > 'predict' it? Shocking!
> 
> Yeah.  The phones are able to make guesses now.  Our enslaved nukes can guess.
> 
> Sounds like we're getting more on a similar page.


	We are mostly on the same page, except 	that all these govcorp crimes against privacy haven't been enabled by 'machine learning'. 'machine learning' is just another tool they use. 


> 
> > 	See the problem with everything you're saying? And it's doubly absurd
> > coming from a programmer who should know how this fuckingly stupid garbage
> > works.
> >
> > 	You're not some old stupid woman who thinks retarphones are magical are
> > you?
> 
> It's hard to stay not one, but not quite yet.

	hehe


> >>
> >> The people in charge?  Old men telling others what to do?  They are so
> >> far
> >> away ... ?
> >
> > 	Yeah far away. They can push a button to hear what you say and send the
> > cops to exterminate you in 30 seconds.
> 
> That's one way of influencing them, but it's kind of slow, awkward, and highly misleading to them.  It's looking like the next time that happens I might get it blockchained.


	The criminals in power are 'far away' in the sense that their subjects can't easily turn them into minced meat or attack them in general, BUT, in turn, the criminals in power are quite close to their subjects when it comes to attacking their subjects. So, putting this in terms of distance obscures the situation. 

	Of course, the whole problem is how to attack these criminals who are 'far away', i.e. well protected. 


> 
> > 	AND, they are working on having EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF GARBAGE you use
> > connected to the arpanet, so that you can't lift a finger without their
> > permision. They are really far away from you or me eh.
> 
> By far away I meant, how to consider relating with these people?

	Relate in what way? The only relationship I want with them is one in which I crush their skulls.

> Obviously their patterns of breathing can control our ability to at
> all.

 
> > 	I'm not entranced by the 'system' and there's no 'mystery' here. I am
> 
> "Addicts are notoriously prone to denial."

	exactly what the DEA says =)

 
> > replying to stuff you say. However you may be right if I consider the
> 
> I can observe that while you are talking to me, you are not talking to
> others.  I use some of your communication capacity.


	Well yes, I AM talking to you after all =)


> > conversation as an instance of you relaying 'the system's' propaganda.
> >
> > 	Another way to look at it is that I'm being trolled by you as well. Which
> > is only 'entrancing' when 'entrancing' is used as sarcasm.
> 
> You observe that I am almost mind controlling you to email me, by
> engaging your familiar habits of replying to email.  You seem to have
> no freedom to refrain from replying.


	I can stop replying if I want to, but there are points I want to make. So are you 'mind controlling' me, or am I writing because I want to? 
	
	We may be entranced by political problems - the technofascist e-mail cocaine is contingent. 


> > 	Yeah, I won't bother explaining why your 'naive' views are nonsense and
> > I'll simply regard them as malicious.
> 
> So, then all I have to go on are the behaviors you focus on.  You'd be
> less harmed by more focus on human leaders?

	
	I'm not being 'harmed' by what you say. If anything it's somewhat annoying, but no big deal. And yes the problem is govcorp agents, both the 'leaders' and the cops who are just as bad (or even worse) as their 'leaders'. Their new technofascist tools do play a role, but they remain just a tool. 

	But what's to be said about the tools is that, contrary to what 'techno-optimists' pretend to believe, 'technology' is a force for evil. 

	
> 
> >>
> >> This results in death, friend.  Oligarchies have more power to beat
> >> people
> >> than we do.
> >
> > 	Yes, as long the we are not organized.
> 
> Planning is important for action.  It involves comparing the value of
> reasons, somehow.

	Planning is very important indeed. 


> 
> >> Also, how would you ever reach them?
> >
> > 	You walk to the joogle offices and burn them down.
> 
> Does that work?  I guess that's kind of possible?


	Well, it works if done in an organized fashion, otherwise we'll end up like kaczynski. 


> 
> This is something you can usually do once.  Burning down a corner
> store, you can get away with that repeatedly.  Burning down central
> offices, you are found and stopped.

	Yes, and by burning the corner store you're playing into their hands.