"Deep learning: Why it’s time for AI to get philosophical"

[gggg gggg]

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-deep-learning-why-its-time-for-ai-to-get-philosophical/

[Jeffrey Rubard]

On Wednesday, October 5, 2022 at 10:59:25 PM UTC-7, gggg gggg wrote:
> https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-deep-learning-why-its-time-for-ai-to-get-philosophical/

Artificial intelligence somehow never seemed like a "philosophical" topic to me.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

No, really. At least historically, I think those AI enthusiasts are a little "slow".

[TruthSlave]

On 06/10/2022 06:59, gggg gggg wrote:
> https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-deep-learning-why-its-time-for-ai-to-get-philosophical/
>

[thanks for throwing this dog a bone.]

The trouble with A.i is it isn't one thing. Its a direction before its
any one thing. Its a methodology seeking an application. Its the idea
of the magic bullet, a plaything for the smartest of smart programmers
to earn his merit badge as A.i programmer. Without a clear idea, A.i
becomes whatever we believe it to be.

We have one idea of a.i as a machine taught to learn. Even when we
aren't clear of the rules, these machines, with enough examples, will
create there own rules, or find rules we never knew existed. We marvel
at this ability, as if it were a form of alchemy. Having created these
ai, or 'smart fit' machines, it seems fine to just let them loose
on the data.

Artificial intelligence, this euphemism is to be taken at face value,
so that as we accept this idea of intelligence, we cultivate an
entirely different order for intelligence. Instead of intelligence as
reasoning, or rational, or what in former times was called wisdom. we
accept the computationally sound as intelligent.

It seems to me bound up in this idea of intelligence is an allegiance
to the past, since its based on a model taken from past data, it
must mean a duty to the status quo. This is A.i bound to a model,
with humanity to adhere to that model. Humanity perceived as erred
for not following the prudent fit. Its same idea for humanity then
becomes one of predicting your next move, your intentions, your will.

Its what's other wise called 'static intelligence', or to use Daniel
Kahneman's definition, its an example of 'system #1' thinking. Its based
on a associations. It is derivative, pandering to our own cognitive
flaws, eg, a bias to believe and confirm. It is always
of the data.

Of course there is that older computing maxim, born of the 'data
processing' age, which still applies even here to A.i. Garbage in,
Garbage out.

All this may suit those seeking mechanized solutions, but you have
to wonder on the ultimate cost where the great mass of humanity are
'processed' by machines, and there are no independent minds to
question the summary claims of these machines. Those summaries to
read as Meta.

Or worst, where we limit our perception of the person to what the
machine was taught to encode as the person. Or worst yet, where
we cheat the data, massaging the data ahead of the machine's
processing of that data. Since these machines have no idea of
falsehoods and won't question what they receive. Once again,
Garbage in, Garbage out.

Or worst where the person is repeatedly processed as so much data,
with no one in the loop to note the effects of this. This too
is A.i. Issuing orders determining the actions of its human
subordinates, who now have no way to ask the question.

As ever those who invent this future on a fancy, wont be around
to see their effects. They'll postulate the theory, for others
to observe. You'll division and perception based on status. Those
on one side of these systems, the creators, who wont know what
happens next. The other side of these silicon Vally dreams is
never to be discussed.

To put it frankly, we don't have enough examples of when these
systems fail, and so there is no will to be critical, let alone
cynical. Its like the religion, where there is too much invested
in the order which comes from this belief, for us to doubt it.
And so we look the other way. or pray we wont succumb to the
same fate. What we don't understand, we accept.

Ai suits the idealized. Its suits the perfect, or the sanitized.
It will serve us with the best fit, as it was designed to, as if
we all existed as discrete projections, part of the same continuum
from which these model based programs take their fit.. These A.i
programs will serve us with the best fit, even when that fit is
no match at all. We absolutely demand this, and these systems
wont ever say no to that demand..

The worst aspect of this A.i future is the lack of accountability.
Humans act knowing they are accountable, but what says us of these
A.i? There is no one person to blame or take responsibility when
A.i makes a mistake.

As cogs in the machine, cogs responding to what A.i decrees, few
will have a sense of the bigger picture. Cause and effect are no
longer relevant, both are kept separate, instead this idea of
intelligence is one with no sense for time or timing, order or
sequence. instead one finds A.i actions based on on correlations
or outcome bias. Ironically these A.i systems wont see the part
played by their presence. Cause and effect.

A.i like Gm can mean whatever we want it to mean. Good or bad.
All that matters is the methodology. The Method comes before its function.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

"Remember -- you're not a slave."

[TruthSlave]

One way or another we are all slaves.

We are all cogs in the machine doing whatever the man says, we must
do, to earn a crust.

I had hoped for another crumb of an idea, to help me turn the page,
but it seems discussion is no longer what we do here.

This place, which use to be a cauldron of ideas and information, is
now become this travesty. A cold pot. Routine dominates but not in
any meaningful way.

We act as adjuncts to machines, busying ourselves feeding Mech with
data. Would-be scribes with nothing to say. Would-be Influencers
commissioned to stifle the germ of any idea which might promote
thought.


All hail Meta.

[TruthSlave]

On 20/10/2022 00:06, Jeffrey Rubard wrote:

"Is a slave still a slave when doesn't know he's enslaved?"

[Something from a previous time of discussions]

[Jeffrey Rubard]

With your friends in the Jefferson Davis Club? Can it.

[TruthSlave]

I have no idea what you mean by that reference, but as you
use it, so too will i.

It would be just like you and your consorts, hanging out here
in a philosophy group, to bait and snare. You with your own
motives, acting as another covert influence. You aren't
answerable for your effects, you can't possibly knows what
happens next.

Meantime those curios, not knowing what they'll find, would in
the normal scheme of things search your reference only to
trigger more automation.

Its A.i again. This time as inbetweener. A.i playing that
game of derivations and associations. A.i with its programmed
bias. In this age, no one connects the threads or seeks the
facts, they just repeat. Look around you. Where did all those
thoughtful souls go?

It seems to me the sole purpose of these entrapment exercises
is to spirit away the thoughtful. Anyone expressing an idea
which might be taken as contrary to our mass control, might
find themselves trapped as fodder in this procedural engine.

And so here you are, too clever by far to connect the dots.
Another believer programmed as repeater, another cog, pushing
as you are are pushed. 'Don't read that, believe this', seems
to be the meat of this meta influence.

You with your belief, acting as a spawn for more crooked data,
having no idea how this works. Garbaged to be processed by
anonymous engines.


Artificial ignorance.

The use of big data to misdirect the needy and the gullible.
The use of keywords to extract from the facts these controlling
opinions. The use of meta to inspire urban drones.. where A.i
becomes a source none can question, as all have influence over
it.


Is this really modernity... this confusion of purpose?

This thread was suppose to be about A.i and philosophy
but look at you.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

Oh, "crud", we threw that shit out in 1865.
(Did. Knew about it in the 19th century, even as whites, and did.)

[TruthSlave]

>>>> "Is a slave still a slave when he doesn't know he's enslaved?"

>>>>
>>>> [Something from a previous time of discussions]
>>>
>>> With your friends in the Jefferson Davis Club? Can it.
>>>
>> I have no idea what you mean by that reference, but as you
>> use it, so too will i.
>>
>> It would be just like you and your consorts, hanging out here
>> in a philosophy group, to bait and snare. You with your own
>> motives, acting as another covert influence. You aren't
>> answerable for your effects, you can't possibly knows what
>> happens next.
>
> Oh, "crud", we threw that shit out in 1865.
> (Did. Knew about it in the 19th century, even as whites, and did.)
>

A lot happened in 1865.

Its hard to tell from what you've said, what exactly is meant.
If it has anything to do with the topic in hand then you will
have to elaborate. I suspect you have a completely different
subject in mind.

This may be the typical ploy of the troll, even so i'll keep
feeding to see if anything of any worth results.. You never know.

Before any kind of discussion we should at least agree on what
we mean. if you want to have that discussion, let me know.


Btw the earlier quote should read :

"Is a slave still a slave when he doesn't know he's enslaved?"

This was the title of a thread which took place on this forum and
is worthy of a read. It should at least show what is possible
as far as discussions in this group go.


To think this trek off-topic started with my handle 'Truthslave'
I am a 'slave to the truth'. This handle was borrowed from another,
and is used by me, the way others use Anonymous.

But back to A.i

Seeing what we want to see, and not the whole. Reading a subset
of the available information to treat it as data, whilst ignoring
the rest. This is once again what our A.i will do as a matter of
routine.

Reacting to 'Keywords'. Reacting to what 'iT' recognizes. Reacting
to its training set, without its proper context, then creating as
truth, Meta.

Meta as the excreta of these anonymous machines. Meta Tags, data
about data, simple summaries leaving those who follow to 'guess'
at the rest. There is rarely a thought to what happens next.

So much follows these Meta systems which appear to pander to our
worst instincts. One might almost says Meta as summary, exist to
incite a savage response, since we'll see first and foremost the
reasons given for these programs. Meta to promote confusion, as
these pre-conclusions. The rest is about us, willing that data to
be so. Organised around this data, we have no choice it seems but
to make it real. Meta slaves.


"umaneyes the machine"

[Jeffrey Rubard]

Yeah, basically. Could you skip the "crud" shit?

[TruthSlave]

The "Crud" as you put it is a staple of philosophy.

Often a simple point is made obscure so that the point is only
known to those making the effort to understand it. Other times
the "Crud" is about establishing a definition of the problem
before attempting to supply an answer to that problem.

Philosophy isn't for those seeking simple answers. There are
no simple answers.

That said, it would help you you could spell out what *you* mean
with examples of this "Crud" so i can best avoid the same in your
esteem company.


The "crud" as i see it, and as it relates to this topic, is the
over-estimation of A.i to supply useful applicable solutions.
Often the human cost of those solutions is overlooked by those
seeking to apply the methodology. For example, answers based on
correlations without the effort to understand the reasons for
those correlations is no real answer.

[gggg gggg]

- It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere. (Voltaire)

= Chains of habit are too light to be felt until they are too heavy to be broken. (Warren Buffett)

- We forge the chains we wear in life. (Charles Dickens)

[gggg gggg]

(2022 Youtube upload):

"Humans are rats trapped in a maze | Balaji Srinivasan and Lex Fridman"

[gggg gggg]

- We imagine that we want to escape our selfish and commonplace existence, but we cling desperately to our chains. (Anne Sullivan)

[gggg gggg]

- It took me a long, long time to break the chains that's inside me. (Manal al-Sharif)

[Jeffrey Rubard]

No, I was talking about neo-Confederate bullshit like this.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

On Wednesday, October 26, 2022 at 10:35:55 AM UTC-7, gggg gggg wrote:

"It's just essentially a 4chan routine, ese."
"What did you call me? Ese? How dare you?"

[TruthSlave]

>> "Is a slave still a slave when he doesn't know he's enslaved?"

>>
>> [Something from a previous time of discussions]
>
> - It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere. (Voltaire)
>
> = Chains of habit are too light to be felt until they are too heavy to be broken. (Warren Buffett)
>

> - We forget the chains we wear in life. (Charles Dickens)
>

Thanks g, your quotes perfectly illustrate my point,
or at least the point as it related to that old thread.

A.i represent a whole other level of servitude and bondage which I doubt
any of those past quotes can allude to. We need the new thoughts,
the new perspectives and insights for this evolving relationship to
the technology.

[TruthSlave]

It would help if you provided an example of what you mean with that
label, neo-confederate.

Its a catch-all which can mean so many different things to so many
different people. Unless we agree on its meaning there can be no
real or meaningful communication.

Instead each is left with his own cultivated reaction to that sound.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

Really kind of not -- I think you don't "get out enough".
Well enough "damned by the common man", including south of the Mason-Dixon line
(in their private moments, of course.)

>
> Instead each is left with his own cultivated reaction to that sound.

Dumb scalawag.

[TruthSlave]

OK friend, first i am not from USA but i do not what a confederate
is, or was.

I have also heard of the Neo-Cons or the Neo-conservatives movement
as they related to Ronald Reagan and the political movement in the
late 70's and early 80's.

What i have never heard of until your particular reference was
the neo-confederate. I wanted to know how that related to you
finding umbrage with my handle 'truthslave'. It seemed only right,
after brought it up, that i ask you to clarify what you mean by
the neo-confederate, by providing an example so that we are all
on the same page.

Instead you reply with insults.

We are after all in philosophical group, where communication is
based on clarity of meaning, not blanket assumptions. Sure i
could 'guess' your meaning, but that is not my way.

You've manage to steer this thread off topic, which to me seems
so like the troll whose mission is one of pushing buttons to
generate the flack he and his cohorts thrives on.

You, i'm sure, will no doubt continue with further insults.

Anyone else would do well to view the thread before it was
taken into this blind alley.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

They're not quite the same thing. "Neo-conservatives do not doubt the
truth of universal emancipation", as it was once slightly portentously
put.

>
> What i have never heard of until your particular reference was
> the neo-confederate. I wanted to know how that related to you
> finding umbrage with my handle 'truthslave'. It seemed only right,
> after brought it up, that i ask you to clarify what you mean by
> the neo-confederate, by providing an example so that we are all
> on the same page.
>

You dumb cracker "aesthete", we are 100% free and you can
100% fuck off.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

(For the audience: That's the sort of thing people with handlebar mustaches and poisonous "lube" love to say.)

[TruthSlave]

"(For the audience: ...."

What audience?

Isn't that your role here, to hang out on these potential forums
for thought, to drive discussion away?

We are free you say, as you stomp on expressions of that freedom.
How does that work? Its strange that you can't see the obvious
contradictions.

This topic '...time for A.i to get philosophical' was an opportunity
for thoughtful exchange, but that's not you, or what you are about.

Your opening remarks made that clear -

'Artificial intelligence somehow never seemed like a
"philosophical" topic to me'.


No you don't need it explained, let alone understood. You don't
do philosophy. You have one function and one function only
- shut it down -

Little wonder this group and others like it are now a travesty of
what they use to be. All thoughtful exchanges conspicuous by their
absence.

" we are 100% free and you can 100% fuck off."

So speaks our champion of freedom, as you look to push more buttons
for your 'audience'. Those buttons a sad reflection of the person
pushing those buttons.


To think there are systems at large, a.i and its ilk, 'the real
audience', responding to you and those like you, threating your
words as data. You and all those like you only have to say it for
others, on the other side of these autonomous systems, to respond
as if programmed by the opportunity.

This too is a.i.

Data taken at face value, garbage in, garbage out. routines.
habits. procedural.


"It's just essentially a 4chan routine, ese." -- troll declaring
his strategy?

[Jeffrey Rubard]

It's not strange that you have these rather rote "idiosyncrasies" of
orthography and a crabbed, urgent diction. You're a "cracker".

>
> This topic '...time for A.i to get philosophical' was an opportunity
> for thoughtful exchange, but that's not you, or what you are about.
>

"Telling it them", etc.

> Your opening remarks made that clear -
>

It's not a duel. OK, cracker, OK?

> 'Artificial intelligence somehow never seemed like a
> "philosophical" topic to me'.
>

It's a non-oppressive statement of view called an "apercu".

>
> No you don't need it explained, let alone understood. You don't
> do philosophy. You have one function and one function only
> - shut it down -

"Telling them to them", etc. Cracker, please.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

Otherwise, your "contemnation" of universal emancipation is disgusting me
and if you're going to have your myth-of-Andromache-lovin' self "fall on"
others to these tiresome piccolo tunes, don't.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

"Frenchin' in the original Grand Ole Opry" stuff, really.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

"That's not a myth, really."
Your thinking on the topic is not "key" to me, though. That's a mythology.

[TruthSlave]

Move along folks, move along. There's nothing to see here just
another ridiculous puppet, another keen slave to Meta.

'your "contemnation" of universal emancipation is disgusting me'

To think this detour started with this troll's impulsive, not
to say, simplistic reaction to My handle 'Truthslave'.

Just like A.i he saw only what he was programmed to see. A key
word in isolation. A word which appeared to be a match, that
word to trigger an impulse, and so ignoring the rest he embarks
on this foolish crusade, as if kindling that singular neuron to
glow. And so it grows. All this effort to prove what isn't there.
All instinct but zero thought, this innate tendency to aggression,
will out.

Another 'clock work orange', you just wind him up and point him
at the next designated target.

He wont see his 'audience' smirking behind his back, 'smirking'
at his ignorance. In the red corner this "Galveston Darwf" eager
rip the limbs off his supposed nemesis, and in the red corner,
a mirror.

His audience must know what he hasn't yet grasped, as they set him
lose on this false scent. Sic em. Another slave to his instincts.
programmed by his fears, shackled to the past, a victim of his own
psyche, still fighting that war his forebares lost. Its time to
evolve, but he his held here, trapped in a bottle of past culture.


"Deep learning: Why it’s time for AI to get philosophical"

The irony. Yeah, maybe as we speak there is a 'bot' being programmed
to philosophies, since that effort is clearly beyond the average yokle.


Move along folk, move along. Nothing to see hear but the future..
Just another meta slave. Move along.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

Dipshit, you write "good English" like a member of Skynyrd with
come dribbling out of his butt. "More impressive to you
than to others", ever heard that?

>
> 'your "contemnation" of universal emancipation is disgusting me'
>
> To think this detour started with this troll's impulsive, not
> to say, simplistic reaction to My handle 'Truthslave'.

It's part of the con. The three Reconstruction amendments are
part of the landscape. Fuck you, inhuman cur. "You are as cute
as a dog" and as smart as one.

>
> Just like A.i he saw only what he was programmed to see. A key
> word in isolation. A word which appeared to be a match, that
> word to trigger an impulse, and so ignoring the rest he embarks
> on this foolish crusade, as if kindling that singular neuron to
> glow. And so it grows. All this effort to prove what isn't there.
> All instinct but zero thought, this innate tendency to aggression,
> will out.

Too stupid for comment.

>
> Another 'clock work orange', you just wind him up and point him
> at the next designated target.

Hey, dumbfuck, hey.

>
> He wont see his 'audience' smirking behind his back, 'smirking'
> at his ignorance. In the red corner this "Galveston Darwf" eager
> rip the limbs off his supposed nemesis, and in the red corner,
> a mirror.

Yes, our noble hero rides in on a "CSA" motorcycle and you "get the joke",
just not your wages or the rule of law.

>
> His audience must know what he hasn't yet grasped, as they set him
> lose on this false scent. Sic em. Another slave to his instincts.
> programmed by his fears, shackled to the past, a victim of his own
> psyche, still fighting that war his forebares lost. Its time to
> evolve, but he his held here, trapped in a bottle of past culture.

"Still fighting the war that his forebears lost?"
1812?

[Jeffrey Rubard]

For serious, there is not really a "key to all the mythologies", though.
Some CSA propagandists thought this, but the "American mind" of
the postbellum era opened considerably.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

(Neither Vico nor Hegel, etc. But definitely not this guy.)

[Arindam Banerjee]

> One way or another we are all slaves.

What rubbish. We are gods or devils, usually something in between.

> We are all cogs in the machine doing whatever the man says, we must
> do, to earn a crust.

Nonsense. We give up our time for some benefits. We may be wage-slaves, but that is not slavery, just survival. For survival compromises must be made.

> I had hoped for another crumb of an idea, to help me turn the page,
> but it seems discussion is no longer what we do here.

I do post my works of genius here, but those whose heads are filled with cobwebs do not notice.

>
> This place, which use to be a cauldron of ideas and information, is
> now become this travesty. A cold pot. Routine dominates but not in
> any meaningful way.

Liar.

>
> We act as adjuncts to machines, busying ourselves feeding Mech with
> data. Would-be scribes with nothing to say. Would-be Influencers
> commissioned to stifle the germ of any idea which might promote
> thought.

Hypocrite slaver-wannabe. USAn Democrat!
>
>
> All hail Meta.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

"Maybe don't help." Rich Southern whites (and some others) seem to understand poorly that since the conclusion of the Civil War in 1865,
this word must be meant in the United States in a *completely* metaphorical sense. No less than three Constitutional Amendments
(the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth) clarified this over the space of a few years.

> > We are all cogs in the machine doing whatever the man says, we must
> > do, to earn a crust.
> Nonsense. We give up our time for some benefits. We may be wage-slaves, but that is not slavery, just survival. For survival compromises must be made.

"Sure."

> > I had hoped for another crumb of an idea, to help me turn the page,
> > but it seems discussion is no longer what we do here.
> I do post my works of genius here, but those whose heads are filled with cobwebs do not notice.

"Did you see Max Stirner? No, really?" (Just kidding.)

> >
> > This place, which use to be a cauldron of ideas and information, is
> > now become this travesty. A cold pot. Routine dominates but not in
> > any meaningful way.
> Liar.

"Please do not play Old Hob with me." More to the point, the direction of
what is really fairly stock "patter" is extremely menacing (and not quite
towards a particular individual).

[Jeffrey Rubard]

It's sometimes called the "mob con", actually. (I think you can see where the claims would go as modern pseudo-legalese.)

[Jeffrey Rubard]

At any rate, it's been a good ~160 or so years that universal suffrage has been "ga-ron-teed", and with it individual liberty.
These people are just time-wasters *in extremis*.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

To part of this: "Oh, yeah? What about women?"
Good question.

[Jeffrey Rubard]

They have universal suffrage, too. Oh yeah. Since *1920*, dude.
"You know, I used to have dreams of showing this kind of guy the errors of their ways..."

[Jeffrey Rubard]

"Um, everyone knows that. Hello."
So, under US law, that adds up to a *complete set* of people not to tell that they're slaves!