Socialists generally despise co-ops, volitional communities (eg. Hutterites) because they work, and provide long-running, successful examples of the benefits espoused by socialists, but ...
They are done by free people, using their own resources!
That is the problem: "socialists" don't want to use their own resources and effort to accomplish their utopian goals; they want to use your resources.
There is no amount of other people's blood and treasure a socialist is unwilling to risk.
Open Source doesn’t imply the absence of property rights.
It’s a choice to invest my own effort into something I choose to give to some people for free.
It literally requires me to use (at personal risk) my savings to create and give a gift to others.
I don’t see “socialists” risking their own wealth to produce and give gifts to others. They take others wealth and give it to their (usually unproductive) friends.
Or, at least package them up as "personnas" and give them an appropriate name, eg. "Church Lady", "Jr. Marxist Barista", "Undergrad Philosophy Major", ...
Actually, those seem like an apt composite description of the PoV of the typical mass-market AI... 8/
Make public the training dataset, and the weights associated with various elements of the corpus. Elements of the corpus must be assigned differing measures of importance or validity, influencing the formation of patterns in the resultant weights.
This would go a long way to reassuring users of the resultant AI, of the neutrality of the trainer.
It would simply reveal the core beliefs of the trainer. If it becomes evident (for example), that Marxist or Keynesian or MMT (or whatever) texts are given high validity measures, but texts by Hayek or Sowell are given negative validity, one could assume the trainer is a leftist, economically.
What benefit is there to not reveal these facts to the users of the resultant AI, if not to hide the internal bias of the trainer? Yet I am unaware of any large commercial AIs that reveal these training bias indicators...
Andrei Alexandrescu is awesome; around 2000 he gave on talk on lock-free wait-free algorithms that I immediately applied to a huge C++ industrial control networking project at the time.
I'd recommend anyone who writes software listening and reading anything of Andrei's you can find; this one is indeed a Treasure!
I’ve been a programmer for 40 years. Many of my friends have been programming and doing R&D for decades.
We’ve been aggressively using the latest AIs as they come out, stretching their limits.
Not one of us is worried about losing anything, and are more excited than ever about the future of programming.
Less nigly work and putzing around, more architecting interesting and novel large-scale systems. We now have a team of decently competent very focused robots buzzing around cleaning up boring tasks, while we work on higher level more interesting stuff.
Today, anyone can get focussed tutoring 24/7 from an AI to quickly move them up the value stack.
So, I guess the "grandma killers" that everyone hated, who wanted to wait for the mRNA vaccines to be tested, were ... right?
"Mounting evidence indicates that these vaccines, like many others, do not generate sterilizing immunity, leaving people vulnerable to recurrent infections. Additionally, it has been discovered that the mRNA vaccines inhibit essential immunological pathways, thus impairing early interferon signaling."
"... thus suggesting that COVID-19 mRNA vaccines could aid cancer development."
This is why we need Unenclosable Carriers, and decentralized/distributed "apps" that cannot be de-platformed, and ...
There is a reason that Holochain was invented, and this entire conversation re-validates it.
The primary marker of Mercantilism (what we erroneously call capitalism, here in the west) is the erection of barriers to competition by entrenched players, via their purchased politicians.
When their control of the money supply, artificial barriers to competition, etc. is made much more expensive and difficult, their hand will be revealed. They will have to expend increasingly expensive (and obvious) force against ever more independent and smaller adversaries (their fellow citizens), to maintain their ill-gotten market positions.
Exactly my thought. But, then I’m a 50+ year old white guy, so unqualified to speak.
In my personal experience w/ carbon fiber overwound tanks for compressed natural gas — my very first thought when I first heard they used a carbon fiber “pressure vessel” was:
“Wow, ballsy; carbon fiber composite is great in tension, worthless in compression”.
The system degrades to be a resistance heater as temperatures drop. Ground-source heat pumps are useful in environments where extreme cold is a risk.
However, in the systems I’ve deployed, I learned first-hand why every business that depends on refrigeration units has their refrigeration tech on speed dial #1 on their phone…
TL;DR: don’t fall for the current heat-pump propaganda.
Everyone’s a libertarian with respect to their own liberties.
It’s only the liberties of others that are up for debate.
So when I see “libertarian tech bros”, I laugh, because it’s clear that it is only envy speaking.
Enlisting the arm of the state to protect your liberties is always “just” - when someone else’s liberties are protected, it is “unjust”.
Bearing the consequences of one’s own actions is now widely considered as fundamentally unacceptable - the consequences must be borne by society: ideally, by your political adversaries, to be most “just”.
Is force not linearly related to the gravity / undesirability of the mandate?
Are increasingly draconian mandates not rebuffed by more and more people?
Are there not plentiful examples of "Socialist" societies attempting to enforce more and harsher mandates, against anyone not willing to "give their fair share"?
If people are allowed to leave such systems for ones more to their liking, do they not flee, unless forced not to?
If those who don't "give their fair share" try to leave and are forced to stay, and staying means that they or their children may die, will they not fight to the death to escape?