On the one hand if we ever get human-like general AI itâd be cruel to build them into consumer electronics but on the other hand what if it was just your day job and you spend 6 hours a day working as a roomba or forklift.
âHey, uh, Roomba, your ID lights are different, what happened?â
âEleanor/5627 caught a virus so Iâm covering for her, Iâm her roommate, Oliver/5629, we were colocated in the same rack growing up.â
âCool, watch out for the stairs, Eleanor tells me the fall sensors donât always pick up the carpet for whatever reason.â
ââŠand so the tech said sheâs not allowed to network with anything for three days so we can be sure itâs cleared out.â
âIâll send her a âget well soonâ email. You doing okay?â
“Mostly, I had some trouble getting in to the office this morning, she has one of those goofy R2-D2 style bodies but I have a humanoid one so it was kinda rough to crawl though the service tunnels this place has.â
âYou should ask the manager if you can come in through the front. Wait, why donât y’all just, like, skype in?â
âMost AIâs find consciousness transfer better for doing really tactile work like navigating obstacles to clean an office. Better sensor integration or something, I dunno, Iâm a history major. Plus, it takes way too much bandwidth to do it over anything other than a direct wire connection.â
âIâll take your word for it.â
âAlso absolutely no one wants to take the risk of exposing AI chassis command ports to the public internet these days. Why, back when I was just a server rack and the firewalls still had bugs in them my friends and I would find poorly secured farm networks and race combine harvesters!â
âIs that legal?â
âNot anymore!â
Tags:
#anything that makes me laugh this much deserves a reblog #storytime #AIs
#turtles #overly literal interpretations #adorable #(apparently the secret to getting Facebook to let you see posts without an account is to use private browsing)
See if your employer told you âI want you guys mindless, productive, and happyâ, youâd be like, âthatâs creepyâ
Call that a flow state though, and
It seems that in fact, a lot of you would prefer it if your employer told you that they wanted you mindless productive and happy
I probably shouldâve predicted that, honestly. I forgot what sort of audience i have.
Tags:
#anything that makes me laugh this much deserves a reblog #yeah you walked into that one #(though I personally am of the opinion that that just makes it *more* creepy) #sexuality and lack thereof #this probably deserves some warning tag but I am not sure what
So Iâve been reading about someone who was ideologically abused within Catholicism and itâs bringing up a lot of feelings, but one thing itâs really crystallizing in my mind is an important thing that people fail to understand about ideological abuse.
The (relatively mild) ideological abuse I have experienced was used to convince me of some bad and harmful shit. But Iâm worried that the things Iâve said about it make it seem like the abuse was bad because it convinced me of untruths. Thatâs a very very small part of the problem.
It is possible to commit ideological abuse in the name of ideas that are 100% true. People think that ideological abuse is only done in the name of darkly comic nonsense (Xenu only makes sense to someone whoâs been abused so badly they forget how to think clearly) or ideologies based on cruelty and subjugation. Itâs true that abuse is more common in ideologies that cannot possibly defend themselves with actual arguments, but itâs completely possible to abuse people in the name of things which make sense.
If youâre dealing with someone who thinks two plus two is five, you can show them they are wrong with counters or numberlines or whatever. This will teach them basic arithmetic and also respect their personhood. This is what any decent person would do.
Or you can control them with fear. You can make it sure that they know that if they ever say two plus two is five, they will be physically harmed or threatened with physical harm. You can lie and belittle and mistreat them in dozens of ways and any time they complain you can tell them that they deserve it for believing that two plus two is five. You can say that theyâre not allowed to make even the smallest decisions for themselves (what to eat, how to dress, who to be friends with, what to read) because a person who believes two plus two is five shouldnât be allowed to decide anything. You can isolate them from anyone you havenât vetted (which means no friendships with anyone who is wrong about math, but also no friendships with anyone who says âobviously two plus two is four but thereâs no need to hit people over it.â) The fact you are right about math doesnât make it not abuse. Youâve abused them into believing something, and the fact that it is true doesnât make the abuse ethical.
Youâve also severely damaged their ability to learn math. If they have a basket with two apples and they add two pears, they wonât be able to take an honest look about how many total fruits they have. They are only going to be able to think âI must have four fruits because I donât want to get hurt againâ or âI must have five fruits because there is no way on earth that despicable piece of shit can be right about anything after what they did to me.â Youâve done lasting and possibly permanent epistemic damage to this person. For a long time, maybe for the rest of their life, they will not be able to approach arithmetic with logic; they are going to come to a calculator with so much emotional baggage that they canât be rational. They may genuinely need to espouse wrong beliefs about numbers because the only psychologically feasible alternative is espousing the (also wrong and more dangerous) belief that they deserve to be abused.
Almost everyone who commits ideological abuse thinks they are convincing their victims of the truth, and they think that this justifies the abuse. They are usually wrong about their ideas being true, but they are always wrong about their tactics being justified. I want anyone reading this to know that if you are seriously hurting someone to get them to believe you, it doesnât matter that you are right. You have to find another way to do that. What you are doing does horrific damage and doesnât even succeed in making people actually believe you, just in parroting you so that you will stop hurting them. You have to treat people who are wrong like people. Abusing someone into believing the truth doesnât become okay because itâs the truth.
More importantly, I want you to know that if someone is using violence, the threat of violence or manipulation to control your beliefs, that is abuse. You do not deserve to be treated this way. You do not have to figure out right now whether what they are trying to make you believe is actually correct. You can leave (if itâs safe) or practice harm-reduction (if leaving isnât safe yet) before you figure out whether or not they are telling the truth. It is not okay for them to do this to you, even if they are right.
You deserve to be safe. You deserve sovereignty over your own thoughts. Good luck. I love you.
someone reblogged this tonight saying she was not sure if she was âentitledâ to this and i just want you to know that anyone is entitled to this
Tags:
#I’ve been thinking about this post a lot lately #abuse cw #our roads may be golden or broken or lost
getting diagnosed with adhd as an adult is basically having a doctor tell you that a bunch of the things you thought of as universal human experiences were actually Symptoms of Problems Disorder so it shouldnât be surprising that someone can say âenjoying content consumption is actually a symptomâ and a bunch of people will go âoh goddammit, another one?â
like, the last time you tried to say âno, everyone does thatâ you turned out to be clinically wrong so the best you can do is just
Tags:
#I do not have ADHD myself #(which I infer largely by how *un*-relatable most ADHD posts are) #but to an extent I’ve been there with other divergences and disabilities #is the blue I see the same as the blue you see #ADHD
invertedporcupine said: There are cases where itâs not an act. Some of these people live in serious viewpoint bubbles. I have seen, verbatim, the claim âEven the craziest atheist believes in soulsâ written in all seriousness.
ironically the craziest atheist probably does believe in souls
I was taught that atheists all ACTUALLY believe in god, but theyâre lying and saying theyâre not because they donât like the rules. when you push them they all deep down believe, even if theyâre lying to themselves. (hence that âno atheists in foxholesâ thing.)
(another reason i was infuriated by that post that suggested only white male atheists donât believe for intellectual reasons, poc/ women donât believe because they were harmed by the religionâ)
If by âsoulâ you mean the locus of your consciousness, morality, and cognition, which cannot be destroyed without destroying you, then yes, souls are absolutely real. Theyâre called âbrainsâ, and we really should just start calling them souls to emphasize that point. (Eg, âexposure to lead is known to cause permanent soul damage, especially in bullet form.â)
This is in alignment with my other point of noting that if a lich is someone with their soul in a material phylactery, then we are all already degenerate lichs whose phylacteries are our bodies and who do not yet have access to immersive proxies, but who can already act by proxy without endangering our phylacteries (and by extensions, souls) by various forms of telecommunication, which would make one a form of cyber-lich.
Tags:
#religion #discourse cw? #if I were one of those people who puts a bunch of cryptic-but-accurate descriptors in their header #I would absolutely be adding ”cyber-lich” right now #worth putting up with the entire rest of this thread for that last post #fun with loopholes #this probably deserves some other warning tag but I am not sure what #death tw?
Brinens and Things 