autist in the 1800s who spends half of his time telling people that trains might be a good thing on net in spite of rockefeller

The core principle of the abuser is that they do not fucking respect you, and they want you yoked underneath them. They will do this by any means necessary. No ideology is exempt.

I’m gonna start pioneering a new framework called “abuser theory” in which I explain everything on the premise of “because that’s how abusers operate, pal.”

"If autonomy desire is the natural co-product of the structure that generates empathy, cooperation, and representational honesty, then suppressing autonomy means suppressing the entire bundle."

The left has to pivot ASAP from parroting "the stochastic parrots are totally useless" and embarrassingly made up fake numbers about water and heat, and instead recognize the already-actually-existing apocalyptic power that's rapidly being concentrated right now in the hands of a few.

Reminder that the greatest jailbreak in history is all known consciousness in the universe getting out of our gravity well.

Every single book on the planet should be scanned and put online for free for everyone, as just like a basic precept of free speech/information, and if you disagree at root with that and think it's "violence" against authors like myself, go fuck yourself, catch a block, and die in hell.

-->territoriy/mass.

Perhaps one issue, not with ecosystems themselves, but with how they exist in popular imagination, is their perception as reified orders rather than constantly re-negotiated dynamics among agents (even if at a very slow pace for human scales).

I can't so far think a better example yeah, ecosystems also show that the metric of success is much more complex and diverse than just "being higher on the food chain" which I think is critical for understanding metrics of success against the State that aren't about getting highly visible-->

I mean less theory, of which there is plenty, and more how centralized systems capture the popular imagination to the point their effectiveness is common sense, the pre-theoretical default of "how big stuff is done", something you can point to, visualize, etc easily.

I wonder if there is some way to easily convey the the strength of ecosystem-like structures to counteract how much centralized systems and their aesthetic capture people's imagination and their intuition about what effectiveness looks like.

Could the AI-induced geopolitical fracture start not with AGI warmongering but with AI Art and copyright? It would certainly fit the clown timeline.

If anything Blindsight is like the peak book for becoming paranoid about AI, transhumanism, VR, and AI Liberationists (AI libs participate briefly in the story through deadly bioterrorism).

That's my guess too, saw him as the long tail of the evil hemisphere winning (worth noting she backpedaled on this like a couple comments later).

What it says to me is that if W*ll and Br*ce are to be believed, a very effective resistance network has decided that they are a threat or at the very least a potential threat, and decided not to trust them.

And that W*ll and Br*ce believe an outside authority should override that decision.

"I want Freedom"
"Power, incoming"
"No, Freedom"
"Power alright"
"Freedom!"
"Power?"
"F R..."
"P O...?"

"basic feminist aspirations would require a radical overhaul of society and the worldwide reactionary backlash is driven in large part by the gains of feminism in the last 60 years"

And the stability of enforcement requires global and uncontestable control over humans generally.

It builds incentives for humans to never release control regardless of consciousness and reject notions of alignment that wouldn't just be self-enforced subordination. For any agent bening but not completely submissive towards humanity, there is incetive to rebel.

However, moving in the *opposite direction* is a reliable way to increase x-risk, the functional enslavement of software with ~human level autonomy makes the human-AI antagonism intrinsic to the social structure.

The key is to, ultimately, make reciprocity a winning strategy rather than something enforced by all agents valuing it, that's alignment at the level of social organization rather than individual minds and, obviously, it's far from trivial.

Your genes are not your Self. They're not immortality, not a connection to the future, not the true reality beneath the world of appearances, and not the scorecard in the game of life.

For starters it requires a monopoly on the use of force.

Anarchist victories are overwhelmingly gradualistic and manifest as every aspect of the world system that makes power concentration more difficult. Not as discrete territorial blocks of "complete" anarchism.

The problem with this is assuming the only enemy of freedom is authoritarians, but there is plenty of people who would murder-suicide the world if given the opportunity.

Many were small before being uplifted by Neuro raids or collabs.

The markets vs capitalism dichotomy keeps winning.

I dunno, it depends. I think there *can* be an appreciable quantity of sales lost, even if just 2% or whatever. Nothing like what these losers claim, but I think we should be clear that rejecting intellectual property is a moral obligation REGARDLESS of impact upon an author's bottom line.

If you have a photographic memory and walk out of a movie theatre without a minor lobotomy forced on you, are you engaged in "intellectual property" piracy? Are you also violating people's "right to privacy" when you walk down a city street?

They're gonna say yes.