A scalpel can be used to cut or to heal, depending on the skill and intentions of the wielder.

Learned that from Stanislov Grof. He was talking about LSD.

It’s not really alleged when they admit in their own interoffice emails that it’s happening.

I was referring to quality lol

I can buy a pack of American Spirits and half a smoke will satisfy me.

I finish a Camel, and I’m like, wtf happened to that thing?

Huh… I was basing this info off huberman labs episode on nicotine. He’s usually very accurate (he’s a neurobiologist and a professor at a major university)

It’s also more addictive than tobacco. Which isn’t saying it’s not safer. But the vape ROA hits the brain faster than smoking. This reinforces the addiction cycle more effectively. One of the reasons crack cocaine is so fucking addictive. It’s vaped cocaine.

Here’s an example.

I was advertised camel smokes as a kid.

Everytime I relapse it’s on camels. Camels are shitty and cheap.

I relapse and then switch to a brand that’s not garbage. Then figure out again how to beat the addiction.

It’s a substance use disorder directly caused by advertising. And cancer causing (so my physical environment).

Here’s another mental illness that’s very easy to trace back to advertising.

Eating disorders.

I clicked on the article before I replied a week ago, and before I replied just now.

The article title does not include the word bad, management, or processes and the word companies is inclusive of those things so it doesn’t matter that it doesn’t.

I’m all for blaming management over rank and file employees. But generally, when I see the word companies I think managers (it’s inclusive of management and processes, as I stated earlier). And it’s not inclusive of employees, who are not the company but work for the company.

In other words, I think we agree outside of you being pedantic :P

That’s the headline in the article.

Unless you’re being pedantic about ‘Companies’ not being specific enough. Because bad management and lack of proper process is inclusive under the word ‘Companies’ when used in the context of this sentence.

Yup, I figured service jobs would be some of the last to go honestly. Replacing a person that works at a desk on a computer all day with a computer is just cutting out the middle man. Replacing someone that requires a lot of physical ability to move around and manipulate objects requires tech that doesn’t live in the cloud.

And considering I’ve been reading about AI taking other jobs for the last year or more, I guess they kinda are the last to go. Now we just sit back and watch it accelerate. Either get UBI or a revolution that leads to UBI. Or the cyberpunk future the oligarchs plan to leave us with as they set their power hungry sights on Mars.

Property is a spook generally.

But I can’t blame journalist’s for wanting to eat.

Which is what this is really about. Food and paying the bills. Not intellectual property.

People have already mentioned local models. Also foreign powers that want to interfere in democratic elections wouldn’t be stopped by this.

2024 is going to be wild for sure. But I see no way to get everyone on board with global watermarking.

Not the original comment but I think the difference you’re looking for is in the copying and distribution. The OC makes the false assumption that the data set is full copies of every object fed into it rather than sets of common characteristics.

For example, my own mind has a concept tree. Tree is not a copy of every tree I’ve ever known but more like lists of common characteristics that define treeness based on information I’ve gathered about treeness (my data set).

Piracy is piracy not because of how it’s consumed, but rather, how it’s distributed and stored, as full copies of the object. Datasets are not copies, in other words. And thus copyright doesn’t apply.

Reading an article to get an idea about what articleness is, is fair use. Reading an article to reproduce it verbatim is not. And as of now, I don’t believe LLMs are doing the later.

Again appreciated. I’m pulling the systems science book from Anna’s archive now and will bookmark and read through the links you just posted.

Thanks for the conversation :)

Same on meeting someone not attached to one view. I’ve quite enjoyed our conversation and will check out the book suggestion.

Any modern books or articles on anarchist conceptions of hierarchy would be appreciated too. My first breakthrough into non-heirarchal thinking (as in I’m an I and need to be in control of everything) came from an oral dmt experience. It helped me a lot in understanding Buddhist concepts of the aggregates, and mental formations especially. And I see a lot of parallels between anarchisms views on property and Buddhism’s no self.

Learning to not micromanage it as much was advice I first came across in a Shambala book and took years to put into practice. (Still takes practice tbh).

That said I think there’s also learning involved. As I mentioned earlier I do physical flow practices and muscle memory is some kind of learning. I don’t know how this learning takes place though as muscle biology isn’t much of an area of interest for me.

I was thinking about our conversation more last night after I went to bed. Are you aware of the moon in the dew drop metaphor? I think I’ve been looking for hierarchies when it’s all cybernetic feedbacks up and down multiple layers. Like the T4 layer, we could call the root, but we’re a reflection of it and it is a reflection of us.

Really hard to not think in terms of hierarchy though.

I’m trying to think of a good way to draw it with language. (1-5)-6-7-8. Sense impressions from the five sense gates (I know there’s more) comes in reflexively from the 8th consciousness (the evolving environment). Mind consciousness (reflective) sits between the sense consciousnesses and volitional consciousness (what do I like/dislike/want/need, i.e discriminatory) forming a map (data set) out of sense experience and a direction out of volitional formations. Enlightenment is turning mind consciousness around and seeing that volitional awareness itself is evolving along/with the eighth or T4 because we’re in a feedback loop. But it’s always multiple loops even if the T4 system seems to be separate from our little 60-80 year lives, it’s not. Our brief period evolved from it and evolves it. No birth and no death.

Sorry that’s more Buddhism than AI or cybernetics. Trying to communicate my understanding (map which is not the territory) to the best of my ability. And this conversation has deepened my own understanding, learning the T4 systems model was a helpful way to look at things and something I’ll keep studying as time goes on :)

Okay, I’ve read over the article and a few links to help my understanding.

I think in the yogacara/eight consciousness model, we’d say store consciousness is the t4 evolving consciousness that stores the collective and individual seeds. T3 would be discriminative awareness or volitional awareness, i.e. what I want (manas or the wisdom of equality in its enlightened state). T2 would be mind consciousness, which through skillful application we can find that well lubed machine you mentioned (aligning itself and manas with store consciousness through practice and deep looking, which resolves fear of death as we’re able to look beyond our individual lives). And T1 the sense gates with only reflexive awareness.

I appreciate this conversation btw and hear what you’re saying about the maps only being maps and how they miss some things like sense of balance.

So yeah, I don’t think machines are T3 systems. No sense of agency. A working space for learning (like mind consciousness) but not ‘self aware’.

In the case of the deaf blind person, and this is an aside, I don’t believe we’re born a blank slate in this regard even if the physical eyes don’t see. Helen Keller described actively in what I would call eye consciousness. Closed eye visual space/dream space. I’m sure there’s variance here depending on the nature of a person’s disability. I.e. neurology vs physiology.

I’m interested in the link and will read it. I’m only an amateur when it comes to coding and a layperson with AI.

And yeah, I don’t think it’s something we can put in a box. The map isn’t the territory and at some point describing consciencness from within using concepts (thinking, with language or otherwise) turns into a dog chasing its own tail. Thanks for the reminder not to bite myself in the chasing (your comment earlier about subtle forms of self aggression).

Also my last post was purely in regards to the first part of yours. I appreciate the insight into moralizing distraction and will retead it when I’m not distracted by the meat of our interesting conversation.

Okay.

So mind consciousness trusted body/eye consciousness. I know what you mean, I dance and do this to enter flow state.

In the early Buddhist model consciousness would be the aggregate of the six sense consciousness. In the eight consciousness model the seventh consciousness might identify more strongly with one of these six, generally mind.

The store consciousness is the aggregate of all eight and that’s what I’m arguing is fundamentally what all experience arises from. The perception of emptiness, i.e. no self (consciousness itself is an aggregate and can’t be separated from its objects) and impermanence (change or time). Sense of time and space. To be conscious is to be aware of something. Movement through electrical synapses stimulated by sense impressions, even just the impression of sound from our own thoughts or the impression of limitless space in the fifth jhana.

I understand your objections to assumptions matter could be conscious based on this model. I think it would be inaccurat because not all matter has six sense bases and the storehouse is itself an aggregate.

But we are matter, and we’re conscious, so the fundamental conditions are there in some simple form. The movement of electrons as you stated.

But fire is fire when it’s fire, and ash when it’s ash. Even if the potential is there we don’t say fire is already ash when it’s not.

If you’re familiar with Buddhism then you’re familiar with the six and eight consciousness models?

Like in your lamppost example, I would argue part of you (body and eye consciousness) were quite conscious of the lamppost even if the consciousness mind was paying more attention to something else. Keeping as much of the senses (including sense of mind) in mind as you’re able to based on the depth of your practice and guarding against distractions away from what is happening now, is mindfulness.

In the eighth consciousness model, again in your lamp post example, we could say the seventh consciousness was occupied chasing after the past or future and mindfulness was barely present. Thankfully your other consciousnesses reacted and kept you safe. Manas becomes aware of this after the fact because its nature is ignorance.

The eighth consciousness is the base. The root. It’s more fundamental than I making. Which is probably what you were doing when you nearly walked into something. Thinking about what you’re doing later. I should do some laundry when I get home, maybe?

People mistake sense of agency (I making, manas, ego) with the base of consciousness. But consciousness is effortless and grasping at me and mine takes effort, its just more subtle effort than most people are aware of. When this grasping stops, awareness continues. In my personal experience.

So, I think it’s possible machines are conscious. If they have a sense of agency maybe the question Western science and the media keep asking. Maybe they just don’t have the models or personal experience to delineate between ego and consciousness. The people asking I mean. Hence the we don’t even know what consciousness is bit I keep hearing. Maybe not Western science. But human beings have been exploring these questions with the tools of Buddhist practice for 2500 years. I trust their definitions and they passed my own smell test.