Well, for one thing, among the general public, AI is less popular than ICE.
And the economics of AI don’t add up, so it can’t last forever. And everything that can’t last forever eventually stops.
I’m not gonna pretend everything is guaranteed to be fine, but I feel like we genuinely have a lot on our side.
Catching up to analysis from four years ago, I see.
Emerson Green convinced me that p-zombies are plausible. So there’s no way to know if a teleporter would end your consciousness.
That efficiency is an absolute good.
“Where” is a question that applies to the physical world. The dream people are constituted of something more fundamental than matter.
When yall gonna arrest Sam Altman?
How many vulnerabilities would’ve been found if we had spent several million dollars on human security researchers though?
Culture is our most important invention as a species. So important, in fact, that we’ve evolved to make it essential to our individual health and collective capacity to function. To deny someone access to interact with culture on the basis of their lack of wealth is cruel and anti-human.
Likewise, developing something like an LLM, which spews thoughtless pollution into the only shared infosphere we have, and displaces individuals’ ability to connect to each other to develop culture… that is an existential threat to the human race and should be opposed vehemently.
Perpetual loop of “bounty encourages bad reports”, “canceled bounty”, “bug reports improve”, “bounty comes back”, “bounty encourages bad reports”…
Science fiction’s superpower isn’t thinking up new technologies – it’s thinking up new social arrangements for technology. What the gadget does is nowhere near as important as who the gadget does it for and who it does it to. Your car can use a cutting-edge computer vision system to alert you when you’re drifting out of your lane – or it can use that same system to narc you out to your insurer so they can raise your premiums by $10 that month to punish you for inattentive driving. Same gadget, different social arrangement.
https://locusmag.com/feature/commentary-cory-doctorow-reverse-centaurs/
Some people genuinely have a problem with it.
But I’m convinced that the majority of it is just: It’s embarrassing (and therefore costs social capital) to defend it.
So therefore: If you attach it to something else you want to attack, you just gave yourself a strategic advantage.
Soooo, programming?
A lot of it probably isn’t legal, but who’s gonna prosecute them?
I agree with Prime on most things, but I think he’s getting this one wrong.
There are more options than just “light-hearted satire” and “earnest business idea”.
The FOSDEM talk is silly, and reads like a skit, but it has a gravely serious undertone.
The security guy has posted on Twitter “I still can’t believe he hooked it up to Stripe lol”.
Meanwhile the LinkedIn of the other guy describes him as a “researcher of political economy of FOSS” at Rochester Institute of Technology, and he runs a non-profit about FOSS for humanitarian aid.
He’s also been very active replying to people talking about the conference talk or the Malus site, asking whether they think this should be legal and what we can do to protect the future of open source.
I think these are people who take this threat very seriously, and are willing to expose themselves to litigation in order to force the issue into courts.
Also there is such a thing as Chihuahua cuisine.
I avoid the potential presence of ads.
I recall seeing some research that suggested “ignoring” ads makes you more susceptible to their content. I couldn’t find it after a couple searches though.
https://fortune.com/2026/03/09/ai-opinion-poll-democrats-iran-war-president-donald-trump/