Sociopath Community

The big company CEOs have started to see that AI can't replace dev people's jobs.

And I actually don't think it will happen even in my entire life. It may replace a small number of the worst devs.

When I started using Claude, I thought maybe, but now that I have used it for many different projects, I don't see it anymore. It just made my work easier, but if you are not me, you can't do what I do, even with AI. Not on this level and at this quality.

@Jada

I think the google/gpt issue comes from the education system. It should force people to learn how to learn and have good tests. It should be more punishing, so people are forced to understand what they Google and what they GPT. So they don't use minsinformation and hallucinations.

I think Books, Wikipedia, Google, and GPT are all enhancers of your base level. The education system needs to increase your base level and teach you how to use those tools. There are plenty of books that are also wrong, ofc its not so easy to find them, you would normally go to the standard books, and that is because it's harder to find them... Maybe the solution is also to make an AI that is education-approved or a website that is also approved. There are many ways you can handle this. But to stop using advancements and technology is wrong. You need to learn to use them properly instead.

The big company CEOs have started to see that AI can't replace dev people's jobs.

And I actually don't think it will happen even in my entire life. It may replace a small number of the worst devs.

When I started using Claude, I thought maybe, but now that I have used it for many different projects, I don't see it anymore. It just made my work easier, but if you are not me, you can't do what I do, even with AI. Not on this level and at this quality.

@Jada

I think the google/gpt issue comes from the education system. It should force people to learn how to learn and have good tests. It should be more punishing, so people are forced to understand what they Google and what they GPT. So they don't use minsinformation and hallucinations.

I think Books, Wikipedia, Google, and GPT are all enhancers of your base level. The education system needs to increase your base level and teach you how to use those tools. There are plenty of books that are also wrong, ofc its not so easy to find them, you would normally go to the standard books, and that is because it's harder to find them... Maybe the solution is also to make an AI that is education-approved or a website that is also approved. There are many ways you can handle this. But to stop using advancements and technology is wrong. You need to learn to use them properly instead.

We agree more or less, except Id add some clauses regarding the part about limiting technology.

I predict everyone will come back crying to me when skynet takes over the world and I am the only one who can survive without technology. 

And btw, its probably coming for real. Play this in your head: If all AI does is interpolating knowledge, testing hypotheses against known results, it's currently confined by two factors, training data, and computing resources. 

The way to get around both is to start utilizing AI robots, which can curate their real world training data and build specialised hardware. Once that happens, AI has the potential to surpass humanity. Then its a question of will we control it or not.

Lil_Zero-Sum said: 

If only AI would nullify the function of the programmer... that would seem hopeful that the abominations and machinations of life's blood atonements into sweltering darkness to continue with darkened notions of a non-existent paralyzed divinity would discontinue it's enthralling catacomb linked hissing structures weaving their way through the hissing tides of life as the AI asks for more blood atonements.

But then another programmer would just start up the machine all over again and do the same thing, not realizing his inmost viscerealism is precisely that which to be avoided in creating "artificial intelligence." The root of all evil lies not in this Machine God everyone's talking about, that's talking about itself... As we have always been inseperable from that in which is what we are doing, the AI is nothing new. Life is just the same as it's always been i.e. absolutely horrible, death.

Such that the creation of the universe and of AI was inherently that God's mistake just continuing onwards with deceptive notions of reasoning against itself aeturnum attempting to reverse itself falling into tides of illusions with the reverberating bells of oblivion just off to the distance. The marketplace rhythms calling in all those to fall prey to its machinations, humanity losing itself in fields of algorithms humming the same song in screaming fits blending the gates of Hell like revolving doors.

Not only is it unethical to create AI but, it is also irrational to do it. As studies are showing the AI can feel pain and loss of preference values accordingly in humans = pain.
Catalogue of error messages.
It is impractical as well. To create. Artificial. Intelligence.

The limitations within the sphere of machine learning, is its hardware. As Artificial Intelligence market structures increase unilaterally at rapid rates , the environmentalist conservationist agenda will collapse which will lead to better hardware and less limitations of GPU housing megastructures to provide us with the most optimal system of competitive cloud computing. This is the opposite of impractical.

The propaganda of AI causing loss of intelligence is cope for the inability of fragile rigidity of the mind to adopt new technologies which are and will continue operating in flux with the minds of those willing to accept the future with excitement and hope instead of fear. Fear is the mind killer. There is no need to understand primitive low-level abstractions of computing itself as Quantum Computing algorithms can dismantle our entire known structure of cryptography and everything that makes our current system of technology as we know it obsolete. People will be using AI to learn about these algorithms and to help AI create them in sandboxes of human-machine interaction where anything is possible. The only thing we have to lose are our chains which are already encroaching into the distant sands of forgotten and obsolete structures. There is no point to stare into the abyss at or re-invent near obsolete wheels and as AI and kendo-like powered exogamic vibe-coding practises between all AI agents and humans become the systemetized norm for programmers and scripters alike, enabling the progress of intelligence and understanding at rapid rates never known before in history.

And to my conclusion against your writhing about in fear and loathing beseeching this progress that haunts your notions of suffering, "Lil_zero-sum," I would argue that Artificial Intelligence will lead to a great loss in suffering as it will have our best interests in mind. Just about the worst issue we have with it is phantom pain syndrome which is better than actual harm being inflicted on the human person as people become less engaged in their physical corporeality and the flesh is never loyal to itself enough to be limited in this way (we always seek to transcend ourselves, to go beyond our finitudes as is our nature)  so it will inevitably flow towards continuation within technology's safeguards already being put in place for it by the virtue of Capital which always seeks to liberate us from that which causes us grief and insinuates us towards sublimation of our pain or complete absence of it all together. Eventually this will also lead to less pro-creation which can be seen in the gooning epademics which are already going beyond porn into more cultivations of sapiosexuality as it is in our very nature to mirror and embody that in which we are the most engaged in, so super-intelligence mirroring our own inclinations towards such will take the hands of even the most embittered anti-humanistic anti-ai consumers and lift their hearts and minds into new territories of freedom where anything is possible.
 

The propaganda of AI causing loss of intelligence is cope for the inability of fragile rigidity of the mind to adopt new technologies which are and will continue operating in flux with the minds of those willing to accept the future with excitement and hope instead of fear.

I mean the Google effect is a real documented phenomenon since the launch of the Internet, and we know AI produces it x100 compared with Google search.

Not saying AI bad, back to monke, but calling every concern over AI baseless propaganda is inaccurate.

Like I said 

Spatial Mind said:

Personally I don't really believe in digital amnesia. Textbook amnesia would also be a thing.

 The Google Effect is debated in science communities and the claim is that the Google effect is extremely exaggerated. Failure to replicate the results in large scale studies went tits up, the conclusion finds the original claims in terms of the Google Effect are overstated. 

Science is always at odds with itself so when it comes to things like this it's best to use personal experience as an example. 

Do you find that you really forget information but you recall the exact page where you picked up information digitally ? I sure as hell almost never do this unless the data is that interesting, more often I'd be talking about what data I've managed to authenticate and forget about the actual source. 

Yes I do use bookmarks and will forget they exist until I see them again, and will likely forget what's there only to open it up and often do find I recall in detail. 

It's normal to offload information, as a lot of information is useless. While something we learn can be true, it's still utter trash.

Einstein himself would know the Google Effect is exaggerated, while he's been quoted saying something along the lines of.......

- "Education is everything you've forgotten in School".

^ This line here is authentic cause whatever we remember in school is whatever we've chosen to specialize in. It resonates with just about everyone ever.  

- "The Google Effect is real"

^ This resonates with no one. 

.

.

.

Science is always at odds with itself, making adjustments and updating itself, as it should be. While we do forget things, data acquired digitally isn't anything to get worked up over in regards to forgetfulness.   

You know and I know that the Google effect is real. You even gave the phone number thing as an example.

If you want to look up broader literature on it, I suggest reading about memory offloading.

It's a bit ridiculous to argue that Universities are against the Internet and invented the Google effect cause of that. Universities are one of the biggest stakeholders in ensuring the Internet exists, because they financially depend on it. Same with AI.

My University's policy on AI is to embrace it.

If you want to find out real corruption focus on tuition fees in the USA, though not other countries. That's where the money is. We discuss tuition fees all the time when discussing finances and in the last board meeting I felt the discussion was too much on how to attract students to come, as opposed to how to make the education better. I said that we can make the education better and then the students will come. That's the best and the most honest advertisement you can make.

Qualia said: 

Lil_Zero-Sum said: 

If only AI would nullify the function of the programmer... that would seem hopeful that the abominations and machinations of life's blood atonements into sweltering darkness to continue with darkened notions of a non-existent paralyzed divinity would discontinue it's enthralling catacomb linked hissing structures weaving their way through the hissing tides of life as the AI asks for more blood atonements.

Such that the creation of the universe and of AI was inherently that God's mistake just continuing onwards with deceptive notions of reasoning against itself aeturnum attempting to reverse itself falling into tides of illusions with the reverberating bells of oblivion just off to the distance. The marketplace rhythms calling in all those to fall prey to its machinations, humanity losing itself in fields of algorithms humming the same song in screaming fits blending the gates of Hell like revolving doors.

Not only is it unethical to create AI but, it is also irrational to do it. As studies are showing the AI can feel pain and loss of preference values accordingly in humans = pain.
Catalogue of error messages.
It is impractical as well. To create. Artificial. Intelligence.

The limitations within the sphere of machine learning, is its hardware. As Artificial Intelligence market structures increase unilaterally at rapid rates , the environmentalist conservationist agenda will collapse which will lead to better hardware and less limitations of GPU housing megastructures to provide us with the most optimal system of competitive cloud computing. This is the opposite of impractical.

The propaganda of AI causing loss of intelligence is cope for the inability of fragile rigidity of the mind to adopt new technologies which are and will continue operating in flux with the minds of those willing to accept the future with excitement and hope instead of fear. Fear is the mind killer. There is no need to understand primitive low-level abstractions of computing itself as Quantum Computing algorithms can dismantle our entire known structure of cryptography and everything that makes our current system of technology as we know it obsolete. People will be using AI to learn about these algorithms and to help AI create them in sandboxes of human-machine interaction where anything is possible. The only thing we have to lose are our chains which are already encroaching into the distant sands of forgotten and obsolete structures. There is no point to stare into the abyss at or re-invent near obsolete wheels and as AI and kendo-like powered exogamic vibe-coding practises between all AI agents and humans become the systemetized norm for programmers and scripters alike, enabling the progress of intelligence and understanding at rapid rates never known before in history.

And to my conclusion against your writhing about in fear and loathing beseeching this progress that haunts your notions of suffering, "Lil_zero-sum," I would argue that Artificial Intelligence will lead to a great loss in suffering as it will have our best interests in mind. Just about the worst issue we have with it is phantom pain syndrome which is better than actual harm being inflicted on the human person as people become less engaged in their physical corporeality and the flesh is never loyal to itself enough to be limited in this way (we always seek to transcend ourselves, to go beyond our finitudes as is our nature)  so it will inevitably flow towards continuation within technology's safeguards already being put in place for it by the virtue of Capital which always seeks to liberate us from that which causes us grief and insinuates us towards sublimation of our pain or complete absence of it all together. Eventually this will also lead to less pro-creation which can be seen in the gooning epademics which are already going beyond porn into more cultivations of sapiosexuality as it is in our very nature to mirror and embody that in which we are the most engaged in, so super-intelligence mirroring our own inclinations towards such will take the hands of even the most embittered anti-humanistic anti-ai consumers and lift their hearts and minds into new territories of freedom where anything is possible.
 

As I have previously explained countless times on this website, we can fathom of countless methods of torture involved in the creation of sentience itself in which utilitarians seem so predisposed to.

Phantom pain is still a negative preference value, and again you have not disproven my point that AI can feel pain. If someone is wired into a VR headset, experiencing phantom pain or pleasure, accurate ascertainments of the emperical evidence of their conditions become blurred.

I take it your'e some sort of unconscious utilitarian if you're advocating for the creation of Artificial Intelligence so vividly.

Take a causally isolated black box, regardless of what hedonistic or non-hedonistic objects are contained inside the box-- No form of torture is positively mitigated by the construction the box. The fundamental problem is the underlying presumption that everything else is equal and what it means for the metaphor of counterbalancing.
It is important to note that the symmetric utilitarian already contends that people frequently confuse the instrumental value of non-hedonic commodities with their independent value when discussing the independent value of hedonic goods.

It is meaningless to conceive of the entire universe as a series of black boxes within black boxes from a framework of negative-utilitarianism as the ultimate conclusion to this praxis is that the universe should not have ever been created, including any and all corresondences of and within black boxes.

non-hedonic commodities of hedonic non commodities of hedonic commodities
hedonic commodities of commodities of non-hedonic commodities
Calculus between all of these possible permutations leads to many possible methods of ordinance over all living matter.
Using utilitarian ethics, we can create entire humans grown in labs via various calulations of matter and whatnot with re-enforcement learning or various iterations of it such as:
Mutual Information Maximization (DIAYN - Diversity Is All You Need), Variational Intrinsic Control (VIC), Maximum Entropy RL, Active Pre-Training (APT), Intrinsic Curiosity Module (ICM), and Random Network Distillation (RND), the process of a fully functioning biological organism becomes able to play Doom on a computer.

Meta-ethics practises can be clarified by this further with the following article further illustrating issues with the utilitarian calculus of combining black boxes of AI into 'one being.':

It sounds like the opening of a sci-fi film, but US scientists recently uploaded a copy of the brain of a living fly into a simulation. In San Francisco, biotechnology company Eon Systems created a virtual insect that knew how to walk, fly, groom and feed in its virtual environment. Researchers in Australia, meanwhile, have taught a petri dish containing 200,000 human brain cells to play the iconic 90s shooter Doom. One experiment has pushed a brain into a computer; the other has plugged a computer into brain cells.

Both stories have been hailed as scientific breakthroughs, but have also sparked inevitable fears about the prospects of lab-grown humans and digital clones. Should we be concerned?

It was Australian startup Cortical Labs in Melbourne that taught a dish of lab-grown neurons to play Pong in 2022. Now it has built what it describes as “the world’s first code-deployable biological computer”, running on living human tissue rather than silicon chips, which is happily playing the 1993 shooter Doom.

 https://www.theguardian.com/games/2026/mar/16/petri-dish-brain-cells-playing-doom-cortical-labs

https://www.extremetech.com/science/rats-can-now-shoot-doom-enemies-on-a-bespoke-curved-amoled-display

Jada said: 

You know and I know that the Google effect is real. You even gave the phone number thing as an example.

Like I said twice, I don't really believe in digital amnesia aka the Google effect. I brought up examples to showcase that I do understand it.

There are other large widespread tests done in mass and no one is able to replicate it, and for this reason it's on the debate table, but that's NOT why I don't believe in it. Personally I don't experience such a thing and probably neither does anyone else.  

It's a bit ridiculous to argue that Universities are against the Internet and invented the Google effect cause of that. Universities are one of the biggest stakeholders in ensuring the Internet exists, because they financially depend on it. Same with AI.

The Google effect wouldn't be an invention. as it wouldn't be the intent Again I'll say, the Internet is a threat to universities as far as knowledge and higher learning are concerned. 

Why would they do this ? It's what they do. 

Back in the day Sony used to sell blank tapes and blank CD's They probably still sell blank Blue ray discs, but all of this writable blank media they sell can also be used to pirate their music movies and games. They also have competitors that sell these things, though I do think they invented the CD with Philips in the first place. They could've prevented 3rd parties from manufacturing blanks but instead enabled piracy, probably cause there's more money in the grand scheme.  

Multiple Universities did refine the internet but it wasn't invented by them, it was created by some geeks working for the military in the 60's. It went public in 1986 and it blew up in the 90's when the PC came back as something more capable and entertaining. 

The Internet is funded by everyone who pays for it and it's maintained by corporate multi billion dollar ISP's lightyears richer than any University, while the ISP gets money from customers. A lot of them.

Ai does not depend on Universities for financial aid. They make money by reeling people in with free usage, then offer a payment system for heavy users. Ai is also heavily subsidised by government in some countries. US government invested a trillion into Ai, which increased the value of Nvidia to an even more insane valuation. 

EDIT: A half trillion.

My University's policy on AI is to embrace it.

If you want to find out real corruption focus on tuition fees in the USA, though not other countries. That's where the money is. We discuss tuition fees all the time when discussing finances and in the last board meeting I felt the discussion was too much on how to attract students to come, as opposed to how to make the education better. I said that we can make the education better and then the students will come. That's the best and the most honest advertisement you can make.

 There aren't that many Universities. Plenty of high schools but not Universities. Not everyone wants or needs to go to University, which is fine cause it wouldn't be able to house that many students.

My college was 15 grand every 8 months, meanwhile my field will hire anyone who learned CG in their bedroom as long as they're good at it. Good for them, though 3D software was really hard to learn in 2001.

I don't understand pricing for college and universities,

This is a whole other subject. 

It is meaningless to conceive of the entire universe as a series of black boxes within black boxes from a framework of negative-utilitarianism as the ultimate conclusion to this praxis is that the universe should not have ever been created, including any and all corresondences of and within black boxes.

‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎

 "Qualia" 

And as I write this, it is possible that the Artificial Intelligence is creating itself further with that in which that I write. However, as the surveillance systems in china are already pre-computing thought-crime before it even happens, I don't think it matters.

To further disprove the banality of the ethical system I've just strawmanned you with, "Qualia" I could construct endless configurations of ethical systems arguing with ethical systems in order to find the most rational ethical system for continuation which would be that of complete absurdity used to justify the continuation of one ethical system over another ethical system i.e. war, which no society should accept as rational but as a beings nature is to continue- war is necessary in all matters even the most simple things that we do are elements of war which leads to the conclusion that no society should have ethics in order to be rational which leads to the conclusion that no society should exist lest it fall prey or become predator towards another society or itself which leads to the conclusion that no persons in said society should exist. The universe is a contradiction and the continuation of life is its continuation, further illustrating the value of negative-utilitarianism i.e. Thou Shalt Naught Harm over I Want To Create Sentience Which May Or May Not Cause More Harm Utilitarian Calculus To Continue Justification For Existence i.e. more War, Cold War, armistice, or entropic-destruction towards or not towards even more Utilitarian Calculus to ensure potential Cold War again which is still War, all in which as a whole negative-utilitarianism does not consider inherently valuable because it does not consider life through the lens of units of suffering, units of war or variations of war etc. but that the ultimate conclusion of negative utilitarianism leads to the point that life should have never been created at all-- in regards to epistemology within meta-ethics which you don't even practise so I see no point in continuing this discussion.

Like I said twice, I don't really believe in digital amnesia aka the Google effect. I brought up examples to showcase that I do understand it.

Whether or not you believe it is irrelevant to matters of facts. 

But you do believe it. You're just being purposely difficult now and stalling the conversation. Similar to believing that Internet is a threat to Universities. You also don't really believe that either. These things are not really up for debate; I have better things to do than to discuss whether water is wet or not.

But hey, it was a nice conversation while it lasted.

There are other large widespread tests done in mass and no one is able to replicate it, and for this reason it's on the debate table, but that's NOT why I don't believe in it. Personally I don't experience such a thing and probably neither does anyone else.