cheap. bitter. there is no "afterlife". but there is a second. a third, an nth... just not for everyone ... how would you design that framework? be honest... sorry, "try" ... to be honest ... play THE game.
I will not engage again.
I thank those who deserve it. With a bow. And a smile.
... to appeal to the widest of audience(s) at the same time.
> filtered and averaged
... feeds, websites, news, ... everything is filtered and averaged, ... we have a lot of city part of town "content" because there are audiences--already there--who are drawn towards city parts of town content and produce ...
> we did not have 1% of the current targeting and retargeting capabilities.
You and I didn't. Some folks did. Some had access to cables. Others to satellites. Some were bosses and managers and fancied their power and enough of all these people had no issue with a lack of boundaries and nothing to stay busy enough with ( or the intensity of their predilections was a little too much ) ...
Convenience and accessibility are not capabilities/skill. To some people in every city part of town, things just don't look like anything to them. Monkey see, monkey do.
> We have not yet seen* the kind of large-scale, individually targeted psychological manipulation that cloud AI products can deliver.
We did. Pre-WW II ..., and afterwards, the old, everlasting Cold War (vs the new one). And there are self-emerging/self-organizing buckets of people who all pledged their allegiance to ideas and plans, works forever in progress and aggregating jobs and expanding industries. People with value and virtue systems, radicalized or called to some need-to-know duty. And the personal level was always covered by applied and philosophical psychology, cultural discourses, however progressively or decadently lead by public figures while peoples' desires were and still are shaped by interactions, social AND parasocial.
Shouldn't we stop wondering whether they have enough time, now that several hundreds of thousands of hours of work already done and work yet to get done are neatly compressed into a few instants?
AI will always be "two" things:
- a search engine that misses less and less and is just waiting for you to increase your processing power
- a tool to cope with your laziness or disability by deferring or skipping intervals of learning curves and/or biomechanics
- an evergrowing compendium of abstractions and intents, formalized or not, by humans, for humans, off humans (even when it's AI)
but that's irrelevant ... because humans will always be only "two" things, as well.
So, ... the threat vector remains unchanged, however AI, accessibility and skill will amplify or change the landscape: casually, no, leisurely ignorant bystanders.
We tend to forget that both, the social and the media part, input and output, are interpersonal, first.
Ad targeting doesn't need improvement. The incentives offered to people with an adverse attitude towards Ads are shit. Think of incentives as having effects and side effects. It's about intent. Free TV had that down ages ago. It was awesome. But they fucked market entry and whole population segments, more or less conservative and/or liberal as well as more or less authentic sub-cultural patchworks were left unserved.
That wasn't even nonsense! MTV, suddenly going away? Uhm, guys, I only get Peeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee... beep boop bop beep boop bop beep... BEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP... (pause) ...brr-ding... brr-ding... Krrrrrrrrrrr-shhhhhhhhhhhh-eeeeeeeeeee-awwwwwwwww-eeeeeeeeeee... Bong-bong-bong... KSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH (click).
Silence ...
around here, and then a lot of popups, ads, .... you know, the wild wild west of internet history ...
We talked TV on the street and in school. And Video games. Now Netflix et al and your feed, too. Who's roofs is most of that media industrial complex under?
Thinking Meta et al and their ads infrastructure and UX weighs as much as that of Free TV is falling for a rather simple Kansas City Shuffle.
"New", only now native media still doesn't interface as well with the brain and our emotional processing as TV and "The News" do. And won't until Neuralink et al get their interfaces all the way up your ... lobes.
Forget Zuckerberg et al and let them do their jobs. They don't need publicity, they need to filter for suitable test subjects, edge case pop segments whose needs & desires are yet to be fulfilled.
There's still a lot of people out there with something to put on the market but they can't because a little something is missing and nobody seems to know why ... something double long running on the news maybe?
All the signals that are missed by the (f)MRI are never "mirrored" in the digital twin even though on screen it will look like it. Bam, Experimenter Bias in the machine and I don't know how to phrase it but ... does this method/experiment leave any wiggle room for Falsifiability?
Even if the Hawthorne Effect does not apply to humans, it most certainly translates onto the brain and sensory (post)-processing-- live and remembered (vs in-memory, stored), real, virtual or imagined.
... I just realized how vastly different peripherals are when real, remembered, virtual or imagined sensory input is (post-)processed ...
It feels more like the machine will reproduce a superficial pattern. And at least some signal streams echoing in the brain on input from the digital twin won't emerge because the digital twin has only part of the data. And that's a premise for an unnoticeable rewiring of what once used to fire together, ... given a hell of a lot of exposure, of course, ... or not ... let's see
EDIT n: the paper says pretty much all that in like ... science, bitch!
yeah but that's a way they want you to behave in order to set up a control group within the target group that continues to behave as expected. the questions to be answered are not which parts of that control group, and how, nudge which parts of the target group slightly off the predicted and/or confirmed results. they answered that way back when. the question is, how can we react to the unexpected results that we ourselves forced. they can't just go on doing the opposite of what's good for them and bad for the users or vice versa, they have 50 years of data on that, some of which, should be noted, was accidently burned or bombed with a bunch of incriminating evidence shortly before investigators arrived ... which should make even the last sus person understand, it wasn't on purpose
Not having enough sex is hard to formalize as a diagnostic criterium.
Joke aside (which is on me), I have doubts that it's about psychiatry being an epistemic mess. And when I say "that it's (not) about", I mean that it's not (or is) relevant to the framing of the problem.
a) it's only been almost 200 hundred years, most of which were spend building crowd control rather than exploring minds, so it's not an issue of semantics and 'mental' x 'neural' topologies defined in as unambiguous terms as possible. psychology drew lines for the wrong reasons but men, who build and still run the field, are, ... well ... not very manly, are they? nobody is, these days. Some mafia says jump & people jump, you read it in studies and subtext all the time, and in real life, just look at the the amounts of highly functioning autistic people just rolling with the rules of conformity in 'realms' with 'grander'--meaning, in context, requiring high education (not the half baked kind)--purpose. It's weird.
b) "regulation" implies continuity, which requires literally no more than 2 things:
1. learning a few rules, which is an active thing, much easier for ADHD and other people than the thing they have no control over whatsoever, which is
2. brain circuits that don't (or do) constantly break continuity of ... all the things that return thoughts and emotions even though the "main" function isn't done, or any (or only some) of the concurrent, async functions called by the "main" function are or are not done, (yet), all while all the 'context and reality and "presence" sustaining functions' are just stable enough ... (minus that cool part of the CNS that does it's thing no matter what)
All that said, I have to check the study in detail.
We should never forget that the personalities of parents (and other involved parties) play a 1337% more important role than the subtype of ADHD or whatever symptoms a person "shows".
vectorized thinking in vectorized context is math.
coding logical abduction into LLMs completely breaks them while humans can perfectly roll with it, albeit it's worth emphasizing that some might need a little help from chemistry or at least not be caught on the wrong foot.
depends, they definitely didn't build "the streets" they plaster with ads but if it's their channel or their website, it's up us to pay for blockers, put effort into doing ourselves or using one of the tools build by generous contributors who crave user-defined spaces instead of 'enforced and conform' ("VC"-)demand-based spaces
it's a form of slavery when someone is profiting off the looong and hard, concentrated work of others without reimbursing them adequately.
that's why piracy Robin Hood Style is fine, but corporate piracy is not. I downloaded a Ghibli movie because I could't afford the DVD. I didn't copy it on VHS then to sell it via e-commerce to 1000 people.
AI companies grabbed IP and pull hundreds of thousands of customers with it, then collect their interactions either way and profit exponentially while Ghibli, Square Enix et al. don't profit from users using more and more AI ...
and most people are not "training" ML models ... people are using copy machines that already learned to compensate for their lack of will to put effort into stuff.
a lot of us been there and enough decided to move beyond and get/become better at being human aka evolve vs get cozy in some sub-singularity. some didn't and won't, and they are easiest to profit from.
200 good software and marketing engineers that ignore studies and fight for a good, evolutionary rational cause ... as good as they make proxy farms for scraping ... damn ... so much after work, so much to write about, so much to critique, so. much. capital.
Just another step in cultural and cognitive speciation.
Brains & bodies, the minds that run on them, as well as the levels of consciousnesses with their context-switched/hopping awareness are not build the same, neither passively, nor actively.
If you propose to make the bulk of the people smarter and more competent vs just more productive you end up with smarter voters and more competent participants on the markets and in civil society.
Nothing big would change but smarter voters and news audiences have been a no-go, despite being a no-brainer, forever.
People are supposed to reason themselves into whatever enlightenment shines brightest during the time they grow up.
None of that is your problem. "It" is not everywhere. You can always build your own or join some net that doesn't even bother laughing about this shit. There's too much more.
> short, simply constructed and direct [sentences]
require an honed writing skill; a finely tuned feeling for language, reading flow and contiguous thought; and while time and effort can culminate in such abilities, they shouldn't be prioritized.
It's better to have adept editors who like fiddling--sorry, tinkering, with syntax and semantics.
I will not engage again.
I thank those who deserve it. With a bow. And a smile.