Much like Uber or Airbnb before them, “artificial intelligence” really amounts to a kind of arbitrage: If we can program a machine to tell us to do things we already wanted to do, we don’t have to take responsibility for doing them. It’s a method for laundering authoritarianism.
"
Except that Uber, Airbnb, and OpenAI are all investments of, and strongly influenced by, Peter Thiel. And to know why that matters, all you have to do is look at the "Political views and activities" section of the Wikipedia on Peter Thiel.
But in all cases, it's because Peter Thiel has put his anti-democratic methodology to business to running those companies, and capitalism in the current environment thrives by being sociopathic, so they have been the most successful implementations of the underlying technologies. Thus, the technologies they represent are now associated with authoritarianism.
It's tragic and I still see no way of changing it without changing/stopping the way money influences politics. Senators can make decisions about deregulating or subsidizing companies, do so before it's public knowledge, and then use that insider knowledge to buy shares. Money is necessary to win office; the more you have, the more it helps you win; and it can be used almost completely without discression or limit. Those who run their businesses most sociopathically will most take advantage of these inroads, to wild success, and then work to make those roads as sturdy and hard to dismantle as possible. (Regarding "those who run their businesses most sociopathically," I read that linked, earlier DZM substact, and just as the AI researcher should have stuck to language like "the appearance of Theory of Mind" over "Theory of Mind," I'll try to stick to "Peter Thiel's business appearance of sociopathy.") This makes these "investors," a word with such demure connotations, with outwardly-appearing sociopathic behaviors all the more powerful. Al the more able to flywheel-influence money into politics into money into politics, and so on And then, sure enough, now we have a vice presidentential candidate with a coin-flip's chance of becoming the vice president that used to be a Peter Thiel employee.
Am I right, that really we're not mad at ride-sharing, house-renting, and machine learning? We're mad about Peter Thiel? And the fact that him and his kind have been in power, and gaining power, since Reagan and seem pretty unstoppable in our lifetimes?
Then like that AI researcher should have been, let's not forget the "appearance," let's not forget the Peter Thiel.
I'm not sure I understand:
"
Much like Uber or Airbnb before them, “artificial intelligence” really amounts to a kind of arbitrage: If we can program a machine to tell us to do things we already wanted to do, we don’t have to take responsibility for doing them. It’s a method for laundering authoritarianism.
"
Except that Uber, Airbnb, and OpenAI are all investments of, and strongly influenced by, Peter Thiel. And to know why that matters, all you have to do is look at the "Political views and activities" section of the Wikipedia on Peter Thiel.
But in all cases, it's because Peter Thiel has put his anti-democratic methodology to business to running those companies, and capitalism in the current environment thrives by being sociopathic, so they have been the most successful implementations of the underlying technologies. Thus, the technologies they represent are now associated with authoritarianism.
It's tragic and I still see no way of changing it without changing/stopping the way money influences politics. Senators can make decisions about deregulating or subsidizing companies, do so before it's public knowledge, and then use that insider knowledge to buy shares. Money is necessary to win office; the more you have, the more it helps you win; and it can be used almost completely without discression or limit. Those who run their businesses most sociopathically will most take advantage of these inroads, to wild success, and then work to make those roads as sturdy and hard to dismantle as possible. (Regarding "those who run their businesses most sociopathically," I read that linked, earlier DZM substact, and just as the AI researcher should have stuck to language like "the appearance of Theory of Mind" over "Theory of Mind," I'll try to stick to "Peter Thiel's business appearance of sociopathy.") This makes these "investors," a word with such demure connotations, with outwardly-appearing sociopathic behaviors all the more powerful. Al the more able to flywheel-influence money into politics into money into politics, and so on And then, sure enough, now we have a vice presidentential candidate with a coin-flip's chance of becoming the vice president that used to be a Peter Thiel employee.
Am I right, that really we're not mad at ride-sharing, house-renting, and machine learning? We're mad about Peter Thiel? And the fact that him and his kind have been in power, and gaining power, since Reagan and seem pretty unstoppable in our lifetimes?
Then like that AI researcher should have been, let's not forget the "appearance," let's not forget the Peter Thiel.