thearctic's recent activity
-
Comment on Armed robots take to the battlefield in Ukraine war in ~society
-
Comment on Armed robots take to the battlefield in Ukraine war in ~society
thearctic Link ParentI'm pessimistic that Russia will collapse economically. They're now in a much stronger alliance with China, have access to enormous natural resources, and will probably be a golden location for...I'm pessimistic that Russia will collapse economically. They're now in a much stronger alliance with China, have access to enormous natural resources, and will probably be a golden location for climate refugees in the future. I'd so imagine much of Middle East and Africa to shift ties to Russia, given how the US has behaved on the world stage.
-
Comment on Armed robots take to the battlefield in Ukraine war in ~society
thearctic Link ParentRussia declared a change in their nuclear policy that they'd deploy nukes if the Russian state was under threat. It's also naive to think that Russia won't probably find someone more hardline to...Russia declared a change in their nuclear policy that they'd deploy nukes if the Russian state was under threat. It's also naive to think that Russia won't probably find someone more hardline to replace Putin when he's gone. Relatively speaking, Putin unfortunately is a moderate.
We can talk all day about principles and good triumphing over evil, but that's not going to end or win a war. I think there is some hope to be had because humans are hardwired to empathize to some degree with those they interact with. Dialogue is necessary and will bear fruit even in a situation that's on paper intractable.
This is a circle we need to square. There is no option.
-
Comment on Armed robots take to the battlefield in Ukraine war in ~society
thearctic Link ParentThe war in Ukraine can only be resolved through dialogue and finding ideological overlap. The theory of the case that, through innovation and determination, we could trigger political collapse...The war in Ukraine can only be resolved through dialogue and finding ideological overlap. The theory of the case that, through innovation and determination, we could trigger political collapse within Russia has proven not only false, but to be in the opposite direction of the truth. One of the things that scares me the most about the Russia-Ukraine war is how much it's accelerated the development of advanced military technology. When we start seeing long range micro-drones that can target individual people for assassination, humanity will be screwed.
-
Comment on Living human brain cells play DOOM on a CL1 in ~tech
thearctic Link ParentDemocracy, if you were to provide a minimalist formal definition of it, is essentially the pooling together of power that is then directed according to the vote of a given constituency. A world in...Democracy, if you were to provide a minimalist formal definition of it, is essentially the pooling together of power that is then directed according to the vote of a given constituency. A world in which there are no constraints on power (ie. the ability to do things, whether that's production or violence) is one where there can be no democracy. That is, only if we constrain the energy supply, it should still be possible to maintain democratic control over how the world operates. A world with limitless energy will operate not unlike a body with metastatic cancer: organizations, individuals, and nations will be able to grow and act with no check on their ambitions. People will say that constraining energy is immoral since it means more people will go hungry, but we have long since solved the food scarcity problem globally and can very easily house all people with current resources. The issue is allocation of existing resources not the quantity of resources.
I think it's the wrong focus to try to compete with AI. Common people currently have very little leverage and are on track, with or without AI, to lose even more if it. I can't imagine that we'd start putting humans in Tesla factories just because they happen to be cyborgs. That also sounds like a pretty hellish world to have to live as barely human cyborgs to maybe sort of compete.
-
Comment on The average US college student is illiterate in ~life
thearctic Link ParentAt the same time, the explosion of long-form content has been interesting. Many people regularly listen to 2-3 hour podcasts now, which was very rare beforehand. I guess there's a K-shaped...At the same time, the explosion of long-form content has been interesting. Many people regularly listen to 2-3 hour podcasts now, which was very rare beforehand. I guess there's a K-shaped trajectory in people's attention spans. If you don't have a taste for short-form content, there's not much worthwhile medium-form content to consume.
-
Comment on US Marines fired on protesters storming consulate in Karachi, Pakistan in ~society
thearctic LinkU.S. Marines opened fire on demonstrators during the storming of the Karachi consulate over the weekend, two U.S. officials said on Monday—a rare use of force at a diplomatic post that could sharply escalate tensions in the country amid widespread protests over the killing of Iran's leader.
Ten people were killed on Sunday when protesters breached the compound’s outer wall after Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in strikes on Iran.
Citing initial information, the two U.S. officials said it was unclear whether rounds fired by Marines struck or killed anyone. They also did not know whether shots were also fired by others protecting the mission, including private security guards and local police.
...
Pakistan is home to the world’s second‑largest Shi’ite community after Iran. On Monday, Pakistan banned large gatherings nationwide after the protests over the strikes on Iran spread, with 26 people reported dead across the country.
-
US Marines fired on protesters storming consulate in Karachi, Pakistan
13 votes -
Comment on Living human brain cells play DOOM on a CL1 in ~tech
thearctic Link ParentI guess I should've been more specific that it dehumanizes human brain tissue, which we can reasonably understand to be the seat of consciousness and as what makes us who we are as individuals....I guess I should've been more specific that it dehumanizes human brain tissue, which we can reasonably understand to be the seat of consciousness and as what makes us who we are as individuals. The objectification of human flesh in general isn't good but in some cases can be justified if precautions are taken and at least the general gravity of the situation is taken into account. I don't think we should be growing human livers for fun or installing humanized tissues in mice for fun. The scientific justification should be sufficient to pass an ethics board. Hair is dead and more like a human product in the way that wool is for sheep, so I think that's much less a concern.
I truly don't see the utility in trying to be "competitive" with synthetic computation, or even trying to infinitely maximize computational ability in general. We've already long solved the food scarcity problem, from a pure production standpoint, globally. We already are on track to solve the greatest life threatening diseases like cancer and Alzheimer's. What need is there to keep going beyond a certain point?
As for medical applications, there are many ways to skin a cat in medicine and I anticipate the number of ways to skin the same cat will dramatically increase as medicine and biomedical technology advances. I'm not sure which article you're referring to, so I'm not sure how exactly they implemented the solution and what results they got. But in general, if there is a medical solution that has substantial ethical problems with it, I'm fairly confident that an alternative solution can be developed or might already exist.
-
Comment on Living human brain cells play DOOM on a CL1 in ~tech
thearctic Link ParentI don't really have an answer as to ethics of those technologies. Maybe we are subjecting the most complex, self-directed ANNs to torture, or maybe we're not. Non-neuronal organoids are less...I don't really have an answer as to ethics of those technologies. Maybe we are subjecting the most complex, self-directed ANNs to torture, or maybe we're not. Non-neuronal organoids are less concerning to me, but there are bio-hazardous concerns I think with seeking to mechanize biology outside of life (ex. imagine a purely biological machine designed to compost food that's released into the wild and causes all sorts of ecological problems).
To me, given how little we know and can ever know about consciousness, we should be especially cautious when tampering with things we know are tied to consciousness in some way. Even if these human neuron circuits are not conscious, I also view it as certainly profane in that it dehumanizes human flesh. That itself has severe negative moral side effects, both in terms of pure pain/pleasure ethics and preserving things I, on "aesthetic" grounds, view as most essential (our humanity, how we derive meaning, respect for nature). The risk of what it may be doing and the certainty of what it will do is enough for me to call it evil.
-
Comment on Living human brain cells play DOOM on a CL1 in ~tech
thearctic Link ParentResponding to signs of harm and distress is an interesting and valid starting point. I do think that the distinction between functional consciousness and subjective-experience consciousness is...Responding to signs of harm and distress is an interesting and valid starting point. I do think that the distinction between functional consciousness and subjective-experience consciousness is quite important ethically. Given that we can't ever understand subjective-experience consciousness through measurement, except through introducing certain assumptions that may or may not be valid, we have a deep moral obligation to skew on the side of moral risk aversion. I don't know where consciousness comes from or what, aside from humans, are or aren't conscious. But the entities I can say with the strongest degree of certainty are conscious are humans, and when I see human neurons being hooked up into biological circuits I view it as both extremely morally risky and profane, in the sense that it dehumanizes human essence even if these biological circuits are not ultimately conscious.
I'd consider doing the same with mouse neurons, or any other biological neurons, only marginally less problematic. There's an interesting and serious question about the ethics of artificial neurons with respect to consciousness, but the distinction between artificial and biological neurons is a vitally important one. Not because there isn't a real possibility that these artificial neural circuits aren't conscious. But if we can never have a true understanding of subjective-experience consciousness, we should view any major step in terms of fundamental characteristics toward human brains to be morally perilous.
Really, the ultimate point I'd like to make is that the distinction between functional and subjective-experience consciousness has extremely profound ethical, philosophical, and metaphysical implications. Because it is logically impossible to scientifically isolate and measure subjective-experience consciousness, we will never be able to make progress on those particular ethical, philosophical, and metaphysical implications through scientific advancement. To suggest that it is possible introduces serious moral risk.
-
Comment on Living human brain cells play DOOM on a CL1 in ~tech
thearctic Link ParentThere's a lot variation in terminology and the term functionalist neuroscience may have been better (namely, the notion that the mind and brain should be described and understood in terms of...There's a lot variation in terminology and the term functionalist neuroscience may have been better (namely, the notion that the mind and brain should be described and understood in terms of evolutionarily-adaptive action guidance).
I never said it was unreasonable to associate the memory of subjective experience, which is all that self-reporting can measure, with actual subjective experience. It's actually extremely useful practically and ethically. The issue is that if you're trying to understand consciousness truly, it becomes circular to say that a measurement of memory is a measurement of experience itself. At the final level of analysis, it isn't and we know that to be true.
Understanding consciousness truly, as opposed to merely for its practical benefits, is also of interest because we cannot understand the basic question why any of us are conscious. It makes perfect sense that complex life needs to make highly complex calculations about how to act based on sense information in order to survive to reproduce. It also makes plenty of sense that these sense experiences, in a functional sense, would need to be collated into a "stage" to be most effective. There is no necessity at all for there to be an actual subjective experience. We could all be "zombies" so to speak and evolution would carry on just the same. If you're interested in answering a question like this, you'll never get there by trying to measure consciousness through a self-reported memory of subjective experience, because it would be circular to do so.
-
Comment on Living human brain cells play DOOM on a CL1 in ~tech
thearctic (edited )Link ParentFor the example of pain or other qualia, we can check brain activity against our own subjective experience (or more precisely, the memory of subjective experience) and, through the principle of...For the example of pain or other qualia, we can check brain activity against our own subjective experience (or more precisely, the memory of subjective experience) and, through the principle of symmetry that human individuals are far more similar than different physically, can reasonably infer certain sense experience in another person from measuring such brain activity. Another implicit principle in this inference is that memory of subjective experience corresponds to actual experience, which is reasonable in one context but circular when you're trying to measure consciousness itself.
The problem with consciousness is that we can't, even for ourselves, correlate any activity in the brain with consciousness itself as opposed to mere memory. Neuroscientists often operate under a behaviorist definition of consciousness, which we can certainly make significant progress in understanding. But consciousness, as in the pure subjective experience, cannot be measured by logical necessity.
-
Comment on British Columbia announces it is making daylight time permanent after years of promises in ~society
thearctic LinkI never understood the trauma around daylight savings. The clock changes, you lose a little bit of sleep for one night of the year then gain a little bit of sleep for one night of the year. It...I never understood the trauma around daylight savings. The clock changes, you lose a little bit of sleep for one night of the year then gain a little bit of sleep for one night of the year. It seems pretty helpful when you live far from the equator.
-
Comment on Living human brain cells play DOOM on a CL1 in ~tech
thearctic Link ParentAnd the truth is, we will never have the ability to measure consciousness, even in the most fanciful thought experiments. Imagine we identified a set of neurons as perhaps being the seat of...And the truth is, we will never have the ability to measure consciousness, even in the most fanciful thought experiments. Imagine we identified a set of neurons as perhaps being the seat of consciousness and decided to zap them on and off then ask them what happened to the subject to test whether their consciousness was affected. We would only be measuring the subject's memory, not their actual consciousness. In principle, it should be perfectly possible to remember an event you were not conscious, in the sense of having an actual subjective experience, for. Even if consciousness was somehow a physical object that we could touch with next-generation physics, we would have no way of knowing that it was actually consciousness.
-
Comment on Living human brain cells play DOOM on a CL1 in ~tech
thearctic LinkThis is evil to me. We have to draw a line somewhere and, for me, this is it.This is evil to me. We have to draw a line somewhere and, for me, this is it.
-
Comment on Is intervening in Iran actually justified? in ~society
thearctic LinkI thought this was a remarkably good video and includes valuable investigation into the opinion of Iranians. My thinking has become more Kantian in recent years, but I'd broadly agree with his...I thought this was a remarkably good video and includes valuable investigation into the opinion of Iranians. My thinking has become more Kantian in recent years, but I'd broadly agree with his final point that Iranians need to brave more labor and danger in pursuit of freedom before the world intervenes. An intervention would also be much more effective if it came from the international community than from Israel and the US.
-
Comment on The Ellison media empire grows again in ~society
thearctic LinkLarry Ellison also has a stake in TikTok. Archive linkLast summer, Paramount Skydance, itself a newly merged media company chaired by David Ellison, the son of the tech billionaire and Trump ally Larry Ellison, put in a bid to buy the combined Warner Bros. Discovery. It said no, thanks, but the interest did ultimately trigger a sales process, and a bidding war. Trump was, by now, back in office, and the issue of CNN again reared its ugly head. Paramount Skydance, which already owns CBS News, had courted controversy by pulling the network in a Trumpward direction; according to the Guardian, Ellison père dangled the prospect of similar changes at CNN, including the ouster of specific anchors—Brianna Keilar; Erin Burnett—whom Trump is known to dislike. By December, the Ellisons were on their heels: Warner Bros. accepted a rival bid from Netflix. [...] Trump didn’t sound pleased. “They have a very big market share,” Trump said, of Netflix. “I’ll be involved in that decision.”
...
Sure enough, by this past weekend, Trump was bashing Netflix again, calling on the company to remove Susan Rice, a former top Obama official, from its board after she predicted future “accountability” for corporations that have bent the knee to Trump. Meanwhile, Paramount, which never gave up on its pursuit of Warner Bros., was given the opportunity to submit a final, improved offer, and did so. Yesterday, Ted Sarandos, the co-C.E.O. of Netflix, met with officials at the White House (but not with Trump himself) for talks that were reportedly cordial, yet ominous for the company’s deal prospects. Around the same time, Warner Bros. announced that it had deemed Paramount’s latest bid to be superior. Netflix had four days to counter it. An hour or so later, however, it announced that it was walking away, stunning the media world.
...
Paramount’s bid now appears to be on a glide path, at least at the federal level.Larry Ellison also has a stake in TikTok.
-
The Ellison media empire grows again
9 votes -
Comment on Ayatollah Ali Khamenei killed in Israeli and American joint strikes in ~society
thearctic Link ParentThe Iranian regime lost a lot of support after their recent crackdown on protesters, making this less of a disaster for America's image than if it had happened earlier IMO. But in either case, if...The Iranian regime lost a lot of support after their recent crackdown on protesters, making this less of a disaster for America's image than if it had happened earlier IMO. But in either case, if there were an organic, materially credible movement to replace the Iranian regime we would have seen it by now. In the absence of such a movement, an operation to topple the regime would lead to a civil war and humanitarian disaster much worse than the Iraq war. The best we can hope for, I think, is that the US's ultimate objective is to only strike fear into the leadership and any future Ayatollah so that future political dynamics are skewed in the US's favor.
In the long term, however, the situation seems intractable so long as the Ayatollah retains the power to disqualify political candidates. Without that single power, waves of reform movements would have already achieved meaningful gains since the founding of the country.
Touché. But are increased arms sufficient to take back Ukraine? Wouldn't Europe need to send large numbers of troops? Would Europe ever even be willing to both be in a war economy and send troops? Could the EU as an institution survive that? Maybe, maybe not. For sure, Europe needs to get it together military to at least deter Russia. But Russia as a fundamental threat I don't think is going anywhere, and a long term strategy of diplomacy and engagement is necessary.