Sue is Writing Solarpunk 🌞🌱
The forces of fascism (Rs, fossil fuels etc) have figured out the best way to stop the left is to weaponize the left's need for moral correctness against itself.
This article on fossil fuel greenwashing illustrates the playbook
https://academic.oup.com/ccc/article/18/1/21/7950795?guestAccessKey=98151a17-ab55-4145-91fe-a4671a94229d
1/n
Kit Rhett Aultman
@dawngreeter @susankayequinn I appreciate what you're trying to say, but I think the logic is the same misguided illogic that leads to ideas like Roko's Basilisk. You're speculating on a future situation without regard to its likelihood or plausibility, then using it as a foundation for additional logic.
Turing Incomplete
@susankayequinn I have thoughts about this!
I agree that you can't be bigoted against a plagiarism machine any more than you could be bigoted against the magic 8 ball. This is hopefully obvious.
However! As a GenAI hater, I do believe there are some GenAI hate arguments that are laying down ground work for future bigotry against synthetic intelligence.
The right way to hate is because it is a useless, harmful grift. The wrong way to hate is because only humans can produce something of value.
Sue is Writing Solarpunk 🌞🌱
A great example of the psyop playbook from a friend:
Sue is Writing Solarpunk 🌞🌱
We gotta be aware of this shit and work to recognize this new playbook. The uncertainty that introduces is also one of the weapons fascists are using to tear everything apart.
6/n
Sue is Writing Solarpunk 🌞🌱
Most of the campaigns like this are much more subtle, co-opting issues the left cares about, pitting factions against each other, and getting the left to destroy themselves over it... or at least do something that advantages the fascists.
5/n
Sue is Writing Solarpunk 🌞🌱
This is a really obvious example, and it failed to work, but just barely. The oil lobbyists went on to mislead people into signing a petition which ended up stalling the effort to set back oil from people's properties in CA.
4/n
Sue is Writing Solarpunk 🌞🌱
Case study "sloth-washing": a fossil fuel(CIPA)lobbyist accused anti-oil activists of not caring about the Amazon rainforest:“Do what? Kill more sloths?...Displace indigenous[people]...If CA oil was harming people the authorities would shut them down under current law!Stop lying about CA oil”
3/n
Sue is Writing Solarpunk 🌞🌱
The playbook being used again and again: find something that's a moral conflict, pick the side that most benefits The Evil People, then get the left to destroy itself trying to reach moral perfection.
2/n
Kit Rhett Aultman
@dawngreeter @susankayequinn Humans created LLMs. When a human uses a digital art tool to draw something, the creative credit goes to the human even though the software did the hard work of tracking all the human's actions, translating those intents into both pixels and portable encodings, etc. An LLM just does a lot of complex encoding in unpredictable ways. Why would we not assert that any "value" made goes to anything other than a human? If anything, humans aren't credited enough.
Sue is Writing Solarpunk 🌞🌱
Nope. Even the worry about "future synthetic intelligence" is weaponizing here, in the present tense, guilt about rejecting AI for the soulless bullshit machine that it is.
It's softening the "hate" of something that's destroying people's livelihoods & the environment. It's serving the wrong cause.
We've also been trained by decades of sci-fi to want to be nice to the baby "machine intelligence" we've created (while destroying actual humans).
I say this as a sci-fi writer: NO
Turing Incomplete
@susankayequinn But I do not think the hate towards GenAI should be softened. I am just saying "only humans can create something valuable" is a silly argument to use when you have actual, relevant, correct reasons for needing it stopped. It is obviously not true that worth comes exclusively from humanity.
Kit Rhett Aultman
@dawngreeter @susankayequinn Respectfully, a position that includes the phrase "future human bigotry against synthetic intelligence" is necessarily using a future hypothetical as the basis.
Turing Incomplete
@roadriverrail @susankayequinn I hate that thought experiment, for what its worth.
But also, I am very much aiming to not base future hypotheticals as a foundation for additional logic. In fact, my claim is that only humans being able to create something of value is actually the approach that assumes future hypotheticals for additional logic today. GenAI being a world destroying theft machine has plenty of implications, but human superiority over other forms of intelligence is not among them
Kit Rhett Aultman
@dawngreeter @susankayequinn this is very much meant in the spirit of collegial critique with someone I recognize as on the same side. I definitely see what you're trying to demonstrate, but I think it's kinda missing on the marketing front. Indeed, it even says things you don't seem to want to say. Like, it initially read to me that you were worried about futures where we have real synthetic intelligence and people are bigoted towards them, denying some kind of rights they deserve.
Turing Incomplete
@roadriverrail @susankayequinn Acknowledging that at this point I don't think this is adding anything other than logic pedantry for its own sake, let me try and break it down because I find this conversation fun.
I think this position is expressing how unnecessary reasoning today would apply to future hypotheticals (human intelligence may not be superior). And I contrast this with unnecessary reasoning today being explained by a future hypothetical (human intelligence will be superior).
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.