How did Mao go from military genius to peacetime disaster? How can someone shrewd enough to win a civil war outnumbered 5 to 1 decide "let's kill all the birds"?
What a fortuitous day to discover; Dwarkesh Patel, "Jeff Dean- Noam Shazeer 25 Years with Google". They, and Dwarkesh personally, provide great insight into esoteric AI for a public including myself who don't know Mo Es from Friggie. There filters through enough trickle down in their introduction to be quite alarming; enough to understand why people like Elon Musk express warnings of tepid caution. The 1st use of IA was in language translation; replication yields more power than intelligence. AI is developing huge and exponentially larger fractal reaching blocks of tokens to access information nearly anywhere with no insurmountable limit driven with thousands of worldwide programmer/researchers now. The AI video leaves Fantasia images dancing in our heads of Mickey Mouse brooms (Tokens) replicating amok in exponential nightmares.
One scary feature is that AI competitors are dealing with heartless technology, "Just the facts, Ma'am". There is no check on interpretation or spin of those facts gathered by AI machinery. Those facts can be spun to be life affirming or life denying; so this is my point. AI is not something that is a novel idea. Buckminster Fuller's 1962 book, Education Automation, although well intended, had a huge flaw especially evident during the Cold War. Fuller's usual anti-Malthusian inertia of ephemeralization, like his Dymaxion car, hit a bump, the same question that confronts us today. Who decides underlying values used to formulate faculty algorithms in Buckminster Fuller's Education Automation? His lofty aim was to tap the top professor of each subject for the central point of dissemination. Who chooses the top Pontiffs?
Dwarkesh's current Substack video juxtaposition provides contrast between AI limitless replication power and Sarah Paine's ironically Malthusian one. To me, they seem polar opposites if AI objectivity might survive. International competition over AI seems useless and locked into global reality that, if successful, there will be no secrets and all AI companies will have ultimately, equal access to the grand data base, like UP is to legacy news corporations. The intellectual power revealed by Dean and Noam is astounding; not just in information handling but literally thousands of megawatts will be driving the hardware. Google located its hardware plant next to the The Dalles Dam in my Columbia Gorge neighborhood that already consumes more power than the aluminum smelter it replaced.
Sarah Paine in Dwarkesh Patel substack lecture series is succinct, astute, brilliant. But her remarks are full of misinterpretation and negative stereotypes, accurate on the surface but toxic in depth. Her facts are spun from Cold War consciousness, one that perhaps only we peaceniks of Cold War immersion can grok. My age of 79 elevates me to Donald Trump's elder. Irreverent? The first nation people of my neighboring Yakima tribe teach their youth with a home driven adage, "Respect your elders". Sarah personally didn't face the Selective Service draft in those fragging days of a lost war.
A brief visit to her Wikipedia biography reveals Paine is respected by many, has accolades, degrees from Columbia and Harvard, and tellingly, a long employment record at the US Naval War College where she teaches war, strategy & policy; not classical history!
Sarah Paine's series of lectures are redundant with spurious and unfair conflations of historical dates and facts but with a consistent Cold War oriented jaundiced eye. Old era of Mao's Cultural Revolution and other failures & mistakes are not compared to China's present day miracle of world dominant industrialization, accelerating standard of living, still robust growth rate and notable lack of tolerance of corruption; not mentioned so far. To be most effective, propaganda condemns with historical events to discredit the present. Typical of State Dept. narratives, absent is acknowledgement of Western comparisons, like Great Depression or Dust Bowl or anti-trust corruption, hegemony, coups, mafia on US side. Polemics! She is consistently one-sided and her series; is sponsored by US military in part. "Mao was brilliant genius as a war strategist, but he was an unprecedented psychopathic murderer of 60 million from starvation."? She blames the Cultural Revolution, uses spurious selected numbers, blames Mao who obviously cared and dedicated his entire life to his people. Never enriching himself, he was far off of any psychological diagnosis of psychopathy in spite of unintended mistakes. Example: Paine allows no quarter for basic weather; the drought of 1970. https://cp.copernicus.org/articles/18/1775/2022/ Drought is the main factor according to grad school students at Institute of Forestry in Haidian District of Beijing, who survived as students separated from families to farm. My professor informant, 2005-08, was left to walk home after being released from peasant work 1,800 km from home. Decentralized agriculture was the norm, new collective farms were small percentage of active farmland as is fortunately still the case. This famine problem Paine presents as a Holodomor {event that was part of a wider Russian famine of 1932-33}. This is intellectually dishonest redbaiting. Drought is not man made, although famine may be human caused to varying degrees. Unsuccessful rain dancers are generally not punished.
Not to pick on her, but Sarah is dandy example of someone teaching Malthusian thought, that there are not enough resources; we are dependent on war to allocate minerals amongst the competing highest powers and who persists in commie-baiting like a reminiscence of a past reality. There are plentiful politicians who share her Anglo-Saxonist position.
The big question about AI remains, "Who writes the algorithms that influence pre and post learning that select tokens that in turn influence algorithms that draw samples of tokens, etc.?" What is to assure that atheistic British Malthusian unquantifiable thought spin does not outweigh the optimism for peace built on position of Malthus deniers like engineer Buckminster Fuller and inventor of binary system computers, Norbert Wiener, who both embraced concept of synergy as did anthropologist Ruth Benedict. Can the human programmers be trusted to program judgement; balance Malthusian scarcity thought with Synergy science? Or will AI be dominated by lightweights like Paine? "Alexa, what is an Arab mother's love for her baby?" https://www.icj-cij.org/node/204176
Please see these current writings right here on Substack:
1. Dennis Kucinich's latest: Cost of Freedom, Confronting Military Industrial Complex is an articulate optimistic essay.
All these are seated in emotion, one could say that is vacant in AI which possible algorithms are arbitrarily contrived at best and subject to conscious manipulation at its most diabolical. I propose a debate between Patel or Sarah and myself teamed with Cornel West, Kucinich, Alon Mizrahi or Tulsi. Sarah can choose her own partners but my suggestion is Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Klaus Schwab or other one-world-government advocate of Anglo-Saxonism; neocon, WTO, PNAC, WEF polemicists who propose to anoint the world by centralization. For this is the puzzle; Centralization or localization and how to balance AI for either. Existentialism argues for decentralization like the New Conservatives and icon of libertarians; good and evil. How would Hanna Arendt argue this conundrum? Ask Jeff and Noam. Meanwhile it can be said that AI is in a struggle for relevance, aside from the filthy lucre. Will it be a CNN parrot or truly what is hopefully intended?
We need a bias for peace, not for more of the same modern failure to be propagated. Tip the balance for survival of human species rather than a Peter Thiel ethereal reality succeeding DNA.
BTW, I find that one of my comments on another Substack is censored!! How and why is this and doubtful that substack can be trusted for open exchange of ideas here?
The only way Mao went from military genius to peacetime disaster was by ignorant, malicious people re-writing history and re-defining 'disaster'.
Says Yale economic historian Maurice Meisner, “In the post-Mao era, it has become fashionable to bloviate about the blemishes of the historical record of the Mao era and to keep quiet about the achievements of the time. Far from being the era of economic stagnation that is now commonly perceived, Mao’s era was one of the greatest modernization in world history, comparable with the most intense industrialization in several major latecomers in modern times, such as Germany, Japan and Russia.”
Starting with an illiterate, typhus-infected population living in rubble, and working entirely under massive Western sanctions and embargoes, Mao provided basic universal health care and doubled life expectancy from 35 to 68.
No country matches the pace of life expectancy increase under Mao, nor its increase in prosperity:
Germany's fastest development growth was 33% per decade from 1880-1914.
Japan's was 43% from 1874-1929
USSR's was 54% between 1928-58.
Mao's decadal growth rate was 64% between 1952-72.
Harvard's John King Fairbank, “The simple facts of Mao’s career seem incredible: in a vast land of 400 million people, at age 28, with a dozen others, to found a party and in the next fifty years to win power, organize, and remold the people and reshape the land–history records no greater achievement. Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, all the kings of Europe, Napoleon, Bismarck, Lenin–no predecessor can equal Mao’s scope of accomplishment, for no other country was ever so ancient and so big as China. Indeed Mao’s achievement is almost beyond our comprehension".
What a fortuitous day to discover; Dwarkesh Patel, "Jeff Dean- Noam Shazeer 25 Years with Google". They, and Dwarkesh personally, provide great insight into esoteric AI for a public including myself who don't know Mo Es from Friggie. There filters through enough trickle down in their introduction to be quite alarming; enough to understand why people like Elon Musk express warnings of tepid caution. The 1st use of IA was in language translation; replication yields more power than intelligence. AI is developing huge and exponentially larger fractal reaching blocks of tokens to access information nearly anywhere with no insurmountable limit driven with thousands of worldwide programmer/researchers now. The AI video leaves Fantasia images dancing in our heads of Mickey Mouse brooms (Tokens) replicating amok in exponential nightmares.
One scary feature is that AI competitors are dealing with heartless technology, "Just the facts, Ma'am". There is no check on interpretation or spin of those facts gathered by AI machinery. Those facts can be spun to be life affirming or life denying; so this is my point. AI is not something that is a novel idea. Buckminster Fuller's 1962 book, Education Automation, although well intended, had a huge flaw especially evident during the Cold War. Fuller's usual anti-Malthusian inertia of ephemeralization, like his Dymaxion car, hit a bump, the same question that confronts us today. Who decides underlying values used to formulate faculty algorithms in Buckminster Fuller's Education Automation? His lofty aim was to tap the top professor of each subject for the central point of dissemination. Who chooses the top Pontiffs?
Dwarkesh's current Substack video juxtaposition provides contrast between AI limitless replication power and Sarah Paine's ironically Malthusian one. To me, they seem polar opposites if AI objectivity might survive. International competition over AI seems useless and locked into global reality that, if successful, there will be no secrets and all AI companies will have ultimately, equal access to the grand data base, like UP is to legacy news corporations. The intellectual power revealed by Dean and Noam is astounding; not just in information handling but literally thousands of megawatts will be driving the hardware. Google located its hardware plant next to the The Dalles Dam in my Columbia Gorge neighborhood that already consumes more power than the aluminum smelter it replaced.
Sarah Paine in Dwarkesh Patel substack lecture series is succinct, astute, brilliant. But her remarks are full of misinterpretation and negative stereotypes, accurate on the surface but toxic in depth. Her facts are spun from Cold War consciousness, one that perhaps only we peaceniks of Cold War immersion can grok. My age of 79 elevates me to Donald Trump's elder. Irreverent? The first nation people of my neighboring Yakima tribe teach their youth with a home driven adage, "Respect your elders". Sarah personally didn't face the Selective Service draft in those fragging days of a lost war.
A brief visit to her Wikipedia biography reveals Paine is respected by many, has accolades, degrees from Columbia and Harvard, and tellingly, a long employment record at the US Naval War College where she teaches war, strategy & policy; not classical history!
Sarah Paine's series of lectures are redundant with spurious and unfair conflations of historical dates and facts but with a consistent Cold War oriented jaundiced eye. Old era of Mao's Cultural Revolution and other failures & mistakes are not compared to China's present day miracle of world dominant industrialization, accelerating standard of living, still robust growth rate and notable lack of tolerance of corruption; not mentioned so far. To be most effective, propaganda condemns with historical events to discredit the present. Typical of State Dept. narratives, absent is acknowledgement of Western comparisons, like Great Depression or Dust Bowl or anti-trust corruption, hegemony, coups, mafia on US side. Polemics! She is consistently one-sided and her series; is sponsored by US military in part. "Mao was brilliant genius as a war strategist, but he was an unprecedented psychopathic murderer of 60 million from starvation."? She blames the Cultural Revolution, uses spurious selected numbers, blames Mao who obviously cared and dedicated his entire life to his people. Never enriching himself, he was far off of any psychological diagnosis of psychopathy in spite of unintended mistakes. Example: Paine allows no quarter for basic weather; the drought of 1970. https://cp.copernicus.org/articles/18/1775/2022/ Drought is the main factor according to grad school students at Institute of Forestry in Haidian District of Beijing, who survived as students separated from families to farm. My professor informant, 2005-08, was left to walk home after being released from peasant work 1,800 km from home. Decentralized agriculture was the norm, new collective farms were small percentage of active farmland as is fortunately still the case. This famine problem Paine presents as a Holodomor {event that was part of a wider Russian famine of 1932-33}. This is intellectually dishonest redbaiting. Drought is not man made, although famine may be human caused to varying degrees. Unsuccessful rain dancers are generally not punished.
Not to pick on her, but Sarah is dandy example of someone teaching Malthusian thought, that there are not enough resources; we are dependent on war to allocate minerals amongst the competing highest powers and who persists in commie-baiting like a reminiscence of a past reality. There are plentiful politicians who share her Anglo-Saxonist position.
The big question about AI remains, "Who writes the algorithms that influence pre and post learning that select tokens that in turn influence algorithms that draw samples of tokens, etc.?" What is to assure that atheistic British Malthusian unquantifiable thought spin does not outweigh the optimism for peace built on position of Malthus deniers like engineer Buckminster Fuller and inventor of binary system computers, Norbert Wiener, who both embraced concept of synergy as did anthropologist Ruth Benedict. Can the human programmers be trusted to program judgement; balance Malthusian scarcity thought with Synergy science? Or will AI be dominated by lightweights like Paine? "Alexa, what is an Arab mother's love for her baby?" https://www.icj-cij.org/node/204176
Please see these current writings right here on Substack:
1. Dennis Kucinich's latest: Cost of Freedom, Confronting Military Industrial Complex is an articulate optimistic essay.
All these are seated in emotion, one could say that is vacant in AI which possible algorithms are arbitrarily contrived at best and subject to conscious manipulation at its most diabolical. I propose a debate between Patel or Sarah and myself teamed with Cornel West, Kucinich, Alon Mizrahi or Tulsi. Sarah can choose her own partners but my suggestion is Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Klaus Schwab or other one-world-government advocate of Anglo-Saxonism; neocon, WTO, PNAC, WEF polemicists who propose to anoint the world by centralization. For this is the puzzle; Centralization or localization and how to balance AI for either. Existentialism argues for decentralization like the New Conservatives and icon of libertarians; good and evil. How would Hanna Arendt argue this conundrum? Ask Jeff and Noam. Meanwhile it can be said that AI is in a struggle for relevance, aside from the filthy lucre. Will it be a CNN parrot or truly what is hopefully intended?
We need a bias for peace, not for more of the same modern failure to be propagated. Tip the balance for survival of human species rather than a Peter Thiel ethereal reality succeeding DNA.
BTW, I find that one of my comments on another Substack is censored!! How and why is this and doubtful that substack can be trusted for open exchange of ideas here?
What a fortuitous day to discover; Dwarkesh Patel, "Jeff Dean- Noam Shazeer 25 Years with Google". They, and Dwarkesh personally, provide great insight into esoteric AI for a public including myself who don't know Mo Es from Friggie. There filters through enough trickle down in their introduction to be quite alarming; enough to understand why people like Elon Musk express warnings of tepid caution. The 1st use of IA was in language translation; replication yields more power than intelligence. AI is developing huge and exponentially larger fractal reaching blocks of tokens to access information nearly anywhere with no insurmountable limit driven with thousands of worldwide programmer/researchers now. The AI video leaves Fantasia images dancing in our heads of Mickey Mouse brooms (Tokens) replicating amok in exponential nightmares.
One scary feature is that AI competitors are dealing with heartless technology, "Just the facts, Ma'am". There is no check on interpretation or spin of those facts gathered by AI machinery. Those facts can be spun to be life affirming or life denying; so this is my point. AI is not something that is a novel idea. Buckminster Fuller's 1962 book, Education Automation, although well intended, had a huge flaw especially evident during the Cold War. Fuller's usual anti-Malthusian inertia of ephemeralization, like his Dymaxion car, hit a bump, the same question that confronts us today. Who decides underlying values used to formulate faculty algorithms in Buckminster Fuller's Education Automation? His lofty aim was to tap the top professor of each subject for the central point of dissemination. Who chooses the top Pontiffs?
Dwarkesh's current Substack video juxtaposition provides contrast between AI limitless replication power and Sarah Paine's ironically Malthusian one. To me, they seem polar opposites if AI objectivity might survive. International competition over AI seems useless and locked into global reality that, if successful, there will be no secrets and all AI companies will have ultimately, equal access to the grand data base, like UP is to legacy news corporations. The intellectual power revealed by Dean and Noam is astounding; not just in information handling but literally thousands of megawatts will be driving the hardware. Google located its hardware plant next to the The Dalles Dam in my Columbia Gorge neighborhood that already consumes more power than the aluminum smelter it replaced.
Sarah Paine in Dwarkesh Patel substack lecture series is succinct, astute, brilliant. But her remarks are full of misinterpretation and negative stereotypes, accurate on the surface but toxic in depth. Her facts are spun from Cold War consciousness, one that perhaps only we peaceniks of Cold War immersion can grok. My age of 79 elevates me to Donald Trump's elder. Irreverent? The first nation people of my neighboring Yakima tribe teach their youth with a home driven adage, "Respect your elders". Sarah personally didn't face the Selective Service draft in those fragging days of a lost war.
A brief visit to her Wikipedia biography reveals Paine is respected by many, has accolades, degrees from Columbia and Harvard, and tellingly, a long employment record at the US Naval War College where she teaches war, strategy & policy; not classical history!
Sarah Paine's series of lectures are redundant with spurious and unfair conflations of historical dates and facts but with a consistent Cold War oriented jaundiced eye. Old era of Mao's Cultural Revolution and other failures & mistakes are not compared to China's present day miracle of world dominant industrialization, accelerating standard of living, still robust growth rate and notable lack of tolerance of corruption; not mentioned so far. To be most effective, propaganda condemns with historical events to discredit the present. Typical of State Dept. narratives, absent is acknowledgement of Western comparisons, like Great Depression or Dust Bowl or anti-trust corruption, hegemony, coups, mafia on US side. Polemics! She is consistently one-sided and her series; is sponsored by US military in part. "Mao was brilliant genius as a war strategist, but he was an unprecedented psychopathic murderer of 60 million from starvation."? She blames the Cultural Revolution, uses spurious selected numbers, blames Mao who obviously cared and dedicated his entire life to his people. Never enriching himself, he was far off of any psychological diagnosis of psychopathy in spite of unintended mistakes. Example: Paine allows no quarter for basic weather; the drought of 1970. https://cp.copernicus.org/articles/18/1775/2022/ Drought is the main factor according to grad school students at Institute of Forestry in Haidian District of Beijing, who survived as students separated from families to farm. My professor informant, 2005-08, was left to walk home after being released from peasant work 1,800 km from home. Decentralized agriculture was the norm, new collective farms were small percentage of active farmland as is fortunately still the case. This famine problem Paine presents as a Holodomor {event that was part of a wider Russian famine of 1932-33}. This is intellectually dishonest redbaiting. Drought is not man made, although famine may be human caused to varying degrees. Unsuccessful rain dancers are generally not punished.
Not to pick on her, but Sarah is dandy example of someone teaching Malthusian thought, that there are not enough resources; we are dependent on war to allocate minerals amongst the competing highest powers and who persists in commie-baiting like a reminiscence of a past reality. There are plentiful politicians who share her Anglo-Saxonist position.
The big question about AI remains, "Who writes the algorithms that influence pre and post learning that select tokens that in turn influence algorithms that draw samples of tokens, etc.?" What is to assure that atheistic British Malthusian unquantifiable thought spin does not outweigh the optimism for peace built on position of Malthus deniers like engineer Buckminster Fuller and inventor of binary system computers, Norbert Wiener, who both embraced concept of synergy as did anthropologist Ruth Benedict. Can the human programmers be trusted to program judgement; balance Malthusian scarcity thought with Synergy science? Or will AI be dominated by lightweights like Paine? "Alexa, what is an Arab mother's love for her baby?" https://www.icj-cij.org/node/204176
Please see these current writings right here on Substack:
1. Dennis Kucinich's latest: Cost of Freedom, Confronting Military Industrial Complex is an articulate optimistic essay.
All these are seated in emotion, one could say that is vacant in AI which possible algorithms are arbitrarily contrived at best and subject to conscious manipulation at its most diabolical. I propose a debate between Patel or Sarah and myself teamed with Cornel West, Kucinich, Alon Mizrahi or Tulsi. Sarah can choose her own partners but my suggestion is Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Klaus Schwab or other one-world-government advocate of Anglo-Saxonism; neocon, WTO, PNAC, WEF polemicists who propose to anoint the world by centralization. For this is the puzzle; Centralization or localization and how to balance AI for either. Existentialism argues for decentralization like the New Conservatives and icon of libertarians; good and evil. How would Hanna Arendt argue this conundrum? Ask Jeff and Noam. Meanwhile it can be said that AI is in a struggle for relevance, aside from the filthy lucre. Will it be a CNN parrot or truly what is hopefully intended?
We need a bias for peace, not for more of the same modern failure to be propagated. Tip the balance for survival of human species rather than a Peter Thiel ethereal reality succeeding DNA.
BTW, I find that one of my comments on another Substack is censored!! How and why is this and doubtful that substack can be trusted for open exchange of ideas here?
Yes, exactly and well elucidated history to counter Paine deceit and revisionism. Please see my post here as we are totally in agreement but I contrasted with Patel video about AI.
Life-Affirming, Life-Denying
©Lon Ball
What a fortuitous day to discover; Dwarkesh Patel, "Jeff Dean- Noam Shazeer 25 Years with Google". They, and Dwarkesh personally, provide great insight into esoteric AI for a public including myself who don't know Mo Es from Friggie. There filters through enough trickle down in their introduction to be quite alarming; enough to understand why people like Elon Musk express warnings of tepid caution. The 1st use of IA was in language translation; replication yields more power than intelligence. AI is developing huge and exponentially larger fractal reaching blocks of tokens to access information nearly anywhere with no insurmountable limit driven with thousands of worldwide programmer/researchers now. The AI video leaves Fantasia images dancing in our heads of Mickey Mouse brooms (Tokens) replicating amok in exponential nightmares.
One scary feature is that AI competitors are dealing with heartless technology, "Just the facts, Ma'am". There is no check on interpretation or spin of those facts gathered by AI machinery. Those facts can be spun to be life affirming or life denying; so this is my point. AI is not something that is a novel idea. Buckminster Fuller's 1962 book, Education Automation, although well intended, had a huge flaw especially evident during the Cold War. Fuller's usual anti-Malthusian inertia of ephemeralization, like his Dymaxion car, hit a bump, the same question that confronts us today. Who decides underlying values used to formulate faculty algorithms in Buckminster Fuller's Education Automation? His lofty aim was to tap the top professor of each subject for the central point of dissemination. Who chooses the top Pontiffs?
Dwarkesh's current Substack video juxtaposition provides contrast between AI limitless replication power and Sarah Paine's ironically Malthusian one. To me, they seem polar opposites if AI objectivity might survive. International competition over AI seems useless and locked into global reality that, if successful, there will be no secrets and all AI companies will have ultimately, equal access to the grand data base, like UP is to legacy news corporations. The intellectual power revealed by Dean and Noam is astounding; not just in information handling but literally thousands of megawatts will be driving the hardware. Google located its hardware plant next to the The Dalles Dam in my Columbia Gorge neighborhood that already consumes more power than the aluminum smelter it replaced.
Sarah Paine in Dwarkesh Patel substack lecture series is succinct, astute, brilliant. But her remarks are full of misinterpretation and negative stereotypes, accurate on the surface but toxic in depth. Her facts are spun from Cold War consciousness, one that perhaps only we peaceniks of Cold War immersion can grok. My age of 79 elevates me to Donald Trump's elder. Irreverent? The first nation people of my neighboring Yakima tribe teach their youth with a home driven adage, "Respect your elders". Sarah personally didn't face the Selective Service draft in those fragging days of a lost war.
A brief visit to her Wikipedia biography reveals Paine is respected by many, has accolades, degrees from Columbia and Harvard, and tellingly, a long employment record at the US Naval War College where she teaches war, strategy & policy; not classical history!
Sarah Paine's series of lectures are redundant with spurious and unfair conflations of historical dates and facts but with a consistent Cold War oriented jaundiced eye. Old era of Mao's Cultural Revolution and other failures & mistakes are not compared to China's present day miracle of world dominant industrialization, accelerating standard of living, still robust growth rate and notable lack of tolerance of corruption; not mentioned so far. To be most effective, propaganda condemns with historical events to discredit the present. Typical of State Dept. narratives, absent is acknowledgement of Western comparisons, like Great Depression or Dust Bowl or anti-trust corruption, hegemony, coups, mafia on US side. Polemics! She is consistently one-sided and her series; is sponsored by US military in part. "Mao was brilliant genius as a war strategist, but he was an unprecedented psychopathic murderer of 60 million from starvation."? She blames the Cultural Revolution, uses spurious selected numbers, blames Mao who obviously cared and dedicated his entire life to his people. Never enriching himself, he was far off of any psychological diagnosis of psychopathy in spite of unintended mistakes. Example: Paine allows no quarter for basic weather; the drought of 1970. https://cp.copernicus.org/articles/18/1775/2022/ Drought is the main factor according to grad school students at Institute of Forestry in Haidian District of Beijing, who survived as students separated from families to farm. My professor informant, 2005-08, was left to walk home after being released from peasant work 1,800 km from home. Decentralized agriculture was the norm, new collective farms were small percentage of active farmland as is fortunately still the case. This famine problem Paine presents as a Holodomor {event that was part of a wider Russian famine of 1932-33}. This is intellectually dishonest redbaiting. Drought is not man made, although famine may be human caused to varying degrees. Unsuccessful rain dancers are generally not punished.
Not to pick on her, but Sarah is dandy example of someone teaching Malthusian thought, that there are not enough resources; we are dependent on war to allocate minerals amongst the competing highest powers and who persists in commie-baiting like a reminiscence of a past reality. There are plentiful politicians who share her Anglo-Saxonist position.
The big question about AI remains, "Who writes the algorithms that influence pre and post learning that select tokens that in turn influence algorithms that draw samples of tokens, etc.?" What is to assure that atheistic British Malthusian unquantifiable thought spin does not outweigh the optimism for peace built on position of Malthus deniers like engineer Buckminster Fuller and inventor of binary system computers, Norbert Wiener, who both embraced concept of synergy as did anthropologist Ruth Benedict. Can the human programmers be trusted to program judgement; balance Malthusian scarcity thought with Synergy science? Or will AI be dominated by lightweights like Paine? "Alexa, what is an Arab mother's love for her baby?" https://www.icj-cij.org/node/204176
Please see these current writings right here on Substack:
1. Dennis Kucinich's latest: Cost of Freedom, Confronting Military Industrial Complex is an articulate optimistic essay.
2. Norman Finkelstein. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBz68F1vTlw
Add:
3. Arundhati Roy September speech, 2009.
https://dharma-records.buddhasasana.net/texts/arundhati-roys-speech-come-september
All these are seated in emotion, one could say that is vacant in AI which possible algorithms are arbitrarily contrived at best and subject to conscious manipulation at its most diabolical. I propose a debate between Patel or Sarah and myself teamed with Cornel West, Kucinich, Alon Mizrahi or Tulsi. Sarah can choose her own partners but my suggestion is Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Klaus Schwab or other one-world-government advocate of Anglo-Saxonism; neocon, WTO, PNAC, WEF polemicists who propose to anoint the world by centralization. For this is the puzzle; Centralization or localization and how to balance AI for either. Existentialism argues for decentralization like the New Conservatives and icon of libertarians; good and evil. How would Hanna Arendt argue this conundrum? Ask Jeff and Noam. Meanwhile it can be said that AI is in a struggle for relevance, aside from the filthy lucre. Will it be a CNN parrot or truly what is hopefully intended?
We need a bias for peace, not for more of the same modern failure to be propagated. Tip the balance for survival of human species rather than a Peter Thiel ethereal reality succeeding DNA.
BTW, I find that one of my comments on another Substack is censored!! How and why is this and doubtful that substack can be trusted for open exchange of ideas here?
Amazing interview. I will be using it as source material for my Substack “Common Sense”.
It should be required reading for every fool enamored with communism.
Please see my comments and post on LonBall profile here on Substack. I am new here and it is not so user friendly. Thank you.
The only way Mao went from military genius to peacetime disaster was by ignorant, malicious people re-writing history and re-defining 'disaster'.
Says Yale economic historian Maurice Meisner, “In the post-Mao era, it has become fashionable to bloviate about the blemishes of the historical record of the Mao era and to keep quiet about the achievements of the time. Far from being the era of economic stagnation that is now commonly perceived, Mao’s era was one of the greatest modernization in world history, comparable with the most intense industrialization in several major latecomers in modern times, such as Germany, Japan and Russia.”
Starting with an illiterate, typhus-infected population living in rubble, and working entirely under massive Western sanctions and embargoes, Mao provided basic universal health care and doubled life expectancy from 35 to 68.
No country matches the pace of life expectancy increase under Mao, nor its increase in prosperity:
Germany's fastest development growth was 33% per decade from 1880-1914.
Japan's was 43% from 1874-1929
USSR's was 54% between 1928-58.
Mao's decadal growth rate was 64% between 1952-72.
Harvard's John King Fairbank, “The simple facts of Mao’s career seem incredible: in a vast land of 400 million people, at age 28, with a dozen others, to found a party and in the next fifty years to win power, organize, and remold the people and reshape the land–history records no greater achievement. Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, all the kings of Europe, Napoleon, Bismarck, Lenin–no predecessor can equal Mao’s scope of accomplishment, for no other country was ever so ancient and so big as China. Indeed Mao’s achievement is almost beyond our comprehension".
You are a malevolent dupe.
What part of Godfree post can you possibly refute?
See my comment:
Life-Affirming, Life-Denying
©Lon Ball
What a fortuitous day to discover; Dwarkesh Patel, "Jeff Dean- Noam Shazeer 25 Years with Google". They, and Dwarkesh personally, provide great insight into esoteric AI for a public including myself who don't know Mo Es from Friggie. There filters through enough trickle down in their introduction to be quite alarming; enough to understand why people like Elon Musk express warnings of tepid caution. The 1st use of IA was in language translation; replication yields more power than intelligence. AI is developing huge and exponentially larger fractal reaching blocks of tokens to access information nearly anywhere with no insurmountable limit driven with thousands of worldwide programmer/researchers now. The AI video leaves Fantasia images dancing in our heads of Mickey Mouse brooms (Tokens) replicating amok in exponential nightmares.
One scary feature is that AI competitors are dealing with heartless technology, "Just the facts, Ma'am". There is no check on interpretation or spin of those facts gathered by AI machinery. Those facts can be spun to be life affirming or life denying; so this is my point. AI is not something that is a novel idea. Buckminster Fuller's 1962 book, Education Automation, although well intended, had a huge flaw especially evident during the Cold War. Fuller's usual anti-Malthusian inertia of ephemeralization, like his Dymaxion car, hit a bump, the same question that confronts us today. Who decides underlying values used to formulate faculty algorithms in Buckminster Fuller's Education Automation? His lofty aim was to tap the top professor of each subject for the central point of dissemination. Who chooses the top Pontiffs?
Dwarkesh's current Substack video juxtaposition provides contrast between AI limitless replication power and Sarah Paine's ironically Malthusian one. To me, they seem polar opposites if AI objectivity might survive. International competition over AI seems useless and locked into global reality that, if successful, there will be no secrets and all AI companies will have ultimately, equal access to the grand data base, like UP is to legacy news corporations. The intellectual power revealed by Dean and Noam is astounding; not just in information handling but literally thousands of megawatts will be driving the hardware. Google located its hardware plant next to the The Dalles Dam in my Columbia Gorge neighborhood that already consumes more power than the aluminum smelter it replaced.
Sarah Paine in Dwarkesh Patel substack lecture series is succinct, astute, brilliant. But her remarks are full of misinterpretation and negative stereotypes, accurate on the surface but toxic in depth. Her facts are spun from Cold War consciousness, one that perhaps only we peaceniks of Cold War immersion can grok. My age of 79 elevates me to Donald Trump's elder. Irreverent? The first nation people of my neighboring Yakima tribe teach their youth with a home driven adage, "Respect your elders". Sarah personally didn't face the Selective Service draft in those fragging days of a lost war.
A brief visit to her Wikipedia biography reveals Paine is respected by many, has accolades, degrees from Columbia and Harvard, and tellingly, a long employment record at the US Naval War College where she teaches war, strategy & policy; not classical history!
Sarah Paine's series of lectures are redundant with spurious and unfair conflations of historical dates and facts but with a consistent Cold War oriented jaundiced eye. Old era of Mao's Cultural Revolution and other failures & mistakes are not compared to China's present day miracle of world dominant industrialization, accelerating standard of living, still robust growth rate and notable lack of tolerance of corruption; not mentioned so far. To be most effective, propaganda condemns with historical events to discredit the present. Typical of State Dept. narratives, absent is acknowledgement of Western comparisons, like Great Depression or Dust Bowl or anti-trust corruption, hegemony, coups, mafia on US side. Polemics! She is consistently one-sided and her series; is sponsored by US military in part. "Mao was brilliant genius as a war strategist, but he was an unprecedented psychopathic murderer of 60 million from starvation."? She blames the Cultural Revolution, uses spurious selected numbers, blames Mao who obviously cared and dedicated his entire life to his people. Never enriching himself, he was far off of any psychological diagnosis of psychopathy in spite of unintended mistakes. Example: Paine allows no quarter for basic weather; the drought of 1970. https://cp.copernicus.org/articles/18/1775/2022/ Drought is the main factor according to grad school students at Institute of Forestry in Haidian District of Beijing, who survived as students separated from families to farm. My professor informant, 2005-08, was left to walk home after being released from peasant work 1,800 km from home. Decentralized agriculture was the norm, new collective farms were small percentage of active farmland as is fortunately still the case. This famine problem Paine presents as a Holodomor {event that was part of a wider Russian famine of 1932-33}. This is intellectually dishonest redbaiting. Drought is not man made, although famine may be human caused to varying degrees. Unsuccessful rain dancers are generally not punished.
Not to pick on her, but Sarah is dandy example of someone teaching Malthusian thought, that there are not enough resources; we are dependent on war to allocate minerals amongst the competing highest powers and who persists in commie-baiting like a reminiscence of a past reality. There are plentiful politicians who share her Anglo-Saxonist position.
The big question about AI remains, "Who writes the algorithms that influence pre and post learning that select tokens that in turn influence algorithms that draw samples of tokens, etc.?" What is to assure that atheistic British Malthusian unquantifiable thought spin does not outweigh the optimism for peace built on position of Malthus deniers like engineer Buckminster Fuller and inventor of binary system computers, Norbert Wiener, who both embraced concept of synergy as did anthropologist Ruth Benedict. Can the human programmers be trusted to program judgement; balance Malthusian scarcity thought with Synergy science? Or will AI be dominated by lightweights like Paine? "Alexa, what is an Arab mother's love for her baby?" https://www.icj-cij.org/node/204176
Please see these current writings right here on Substack:
1. Dennis Kucinich's latest: Cost of Freedom, Confronting Military Industrial Complex is an articulate optimistic essay.
2. Norman Finkelstein. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBz68F1vTlw
Add:
3. Arundhati Roy September speech, 2009.
https://dharma-records.buddhasasana.net/texts/arundhati-roys-speech-come-september
All these are seated in emotion, one could say that is vacant in AI which possible algorithms are arbitrarily contrived at best and subject to conscious manipulation at its most diabolical. I propose a debate between Patel or Sarah and myself teamed with Cornel West, Kucinich, Alon Mizrahi or Tulsi. Sarah can choose her own partners but my suggestion is Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Klaus Schwab or other one-world-government advocate of Anglo-Saxonism; neocon, WTO, PNAC, WEF polemicists who propose to anoint the world by centralization. For this is the puzzle; Centralization or localization and how to balance AI for either. Existentialism argues for decentralization like the New Conservatives and icon of libertarians; good and evil. How would Hanna Arendt argue this conundrum? Ask Jeff and Noam. Meanwhile it can be said that AI is in a struggle for relevance, aside from the filthy lucre. Will it be a CNN parrot or truly what is hopefully intended?
We need a bias for peace, not for more of the same modern failure to be propagated. Tip the balance for survival of human species rather than a Peter Thiel ethereal reality succeeding DNA.
BTW, I find that one of my comments on another Substack is censored!! How and why is this and doubtful that substack can be trusted for open exchange of ideas here?
Life-Affirming, Life-Denying
©Lon Ball
What a fortuitous day to discover; Dwarkesh Patel, "Jeff Dean- Noam Shazeer 25 Years with Google". They, and Dwarkesh personally, provide great insight into esoteric AI for a public including myself who don't know Mo Es from Friggie. There filters through enough trickle down in their introduction to be quite alarming; enough to understand why people like Elon Musk express warnings of tepid caution. The 1st use of IA was in language translation; replication yields more power than intelligence. AI is developing huge and exponentially larger fractal reaching blocks of tokens to access information nearly anywhere with no insurmountable limit driven with thousands of worldwide programmer/researchers now. The AI video leaves Fantasia images dancing in our heads of Mickey Mouse brooms (Tokens) replicating amok in exponential nightmares.
One scary feature is that AI competitors are dealing with heartless technology, "Just the facts, Ma'am". There is no check on interpretation or spin of those facts gathered by AI machinery. Those facts can be spun to be life affirming or life denying; so this is my point. AI is not something that is a novel idea. Buckminster Fuller's 1962 book, Education Automation, although well intended, had a huge flaw especially evident during the Cold War. Fuller's usual anti-Malthusian inertia of ephemeralization, like his Dymaxion car, hit a bump, the same question that confronts us today. Who decides underlying values used to formulate faculty algorithms in Buckminster Fuller's Education Automation? His lofty aim was to tap the top professor of each subject for the central point of dissemination. Who chooses the top Pontiffs?
Dwarkesh's current Substack video juxtaposition provides contrast between AI limitless replication power and Sarah Paine's ironically Malthusian one. To me, they seem polar opposites if AI objectivity might survive. International competition over AI seems useless and locked into global reality that, if successful, there will be no secrets and all AI companies will have ultimately, equal access to the grand data base, like UP is to legacy news corporations. The intellectual power revealed by Dean and Noam is astounding; not just in information handling but literally thousands of megawatts will be driving the hardware. Google located its hardware plant next to the The Dalles Dam in my Columbia Gorge neighborhood that already consumes more power than the aluminum smelter it replaced.
Sarah Paine in Dwarkesh Patel substack lecture series is succinct, astute, brilliant. But her remarks are full of misinterpretation and negative stereotypes, accurate on the surface but toxic in depth. Her facts are spun from Cold War consciousness, one that perhaps only we peaceniks of Cold War immersion can grok. My age of 79 elevates me to Donald Trump's elder. Irreverent? The first nation people of my neighboring Yakima tribe teach their youth with a home driven adage, "Respect your elders". Sarah personally didn't face the Selective Service draft in those fragging days of a lost war.
A brief visit to her Wikipedia biography reveals Paine is respected by many, has accolades, degrees from Columbia and Harvard, and tellingly, a long employment record at the US Naval War College where she teaches war, strategy & policy; not classical history!
Sarah Paine's series of lectures are redundant with spurious and unfair conflations of historical dates and facts but with a consistent Cold War oriented jaundiced eye. Old era of Mao's Cultural Revolution and other failures & mistakes are not compared to China's present day miracle of world dominant industrialization, accelerating standard of living, still robust growth rate and notable lack of tolerance of corruption; not mentioned so far. To be most effective, propaganda condemns with historical events to discredit the present. Typical of State Dept. narratives, absent is acknowledgement of Western comparisons, like Great Depression or Dust Bowl or anti-trust corruption, hegemony, coups, mafia on US side. Polemics! She is consistently one-sided and her series; is sponsored by US military in part. "Mao was brilliant genius as a war strategist, but he was an unprecedented psychopathic murderer of 60 million from starvation."? She blames the Cultural Revolution, uses spurious selected numbers, blames Mao who obviously cared and dedicated his entire life to his people. Never enriching himself, he was far off of any psychological diagnosis of psychopathy in spite of unintended mistakes. Example: Paine allows no quarter for basic weather; the drought of 1970. https://cp.copernicus.org/articles/18/1775/2022/ Drought is the main factor according to grad school students at Institute of Forestry in Haidian District of Beijing, who survived as students separated from families to farm. My professor informant, 2005-08, was left to walk home after being released from peasant work 1,800 km from home. Decentralized agriculture was the norm, new collective farms were small percentage of active farmland as is fortunately still the case. This famine problem Paine presents as a Holodomor {event that was part of a wider Russian famine of 1932-33}. This is intellectually dishonest redbaiting. Drought is not man made, although famine may be human caused to varying degrees. Unsuccessful rain dancers are generally not punished.
Not to pick on her, but Sarah is dandy example of someone teaching Malthusian thought, that there are not enough resources; we are dependent on war to allocate minerals amongst the competing highest powers and who persists in commie-baiting like a reminiscence of a past reality. There are plentiful politicians who share her Anglo-Saxonist position.
The big question about AI remains, "Who writes the algorithms that influence pre and post learning that select tokens that in turn influence algorithms that draw samples of tokens, etc.?" What is to assure that atheistic British Malthusian unquantifiable thought spin does not outweigh the optimism for peace built on position of Malthus deniers like engineer Buckminster Fuller and inventor of binary system computers, Norbert Wiener, who both embraced concept of synergy as did anthropologist Ruth Benedict. Can the human programmers be trusted to program judgement; balance Malthusian scarcity thought with Synergy science? Or will AI be dominated by lightweights like Paine? "Alexa, what is an Arab mother's love for her baby?" https://www.icj-cij.org/node/204176
Please see these current writings right here on Substack:
1. Dennis Kucinich's latest: Cost of Freedom, Confronting Military Industrial Complex is an articulate optimistic essay.
2. Norman Finkelstein. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBz68F1vTlw
Add:
3. Arundhati Roy September speech, 2009.
https://dharma-records.buddhasasana.net/texts/arundhati-roys-speech-come-september
All these are seated in emotion, one could say that is vacant in AI which possible algorithms are arbitrarily contrived at best and subject to conscious manipulation at its most diabolical. I propose a debate between Patel or Sarah and myself teamed with Cornel West, Kucinich, Alon Mizrahi or Tulsi. Sarah can choose her own partners but my suggestion is Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Klaus Schwab or other one-world-government advocate of Anglo-Saxonism; neocon, WTO, PNAC, WEF polemicists who propose to anoint the world by centralization. For this is the puzzle; Centralization or localization and how to balance AI for either. Existentialism argues for decentralization like the New Conservatives and icon of libertarians; good and evil. How would Hanna Arendt argue this conundrum? Ask Jeff and Noam. Meanwhile it can be said that AI is in a struggle for relevance, aside from the filthy lucre. Will it be a CNN parrot or truly what is hopefully intended?
We need a bias for peace, not for more of the same modern failure to be propagated. Tip the balance for survival of human species rather than a Peter Thiel ethereal reality succeeding DNA.
BTW, I find that one of my comments on another Substack is censored!! How and why is this and doubtful that substack can be trusted for open exchange of ideas here?
Yes, exactly and well elucidated history to counter Paine deceit and revisionism. Please see my post here as we are totally in agreement but I contrasted with Patel video about AI.
What is phase two? Tried looking in the transcript and didn’t see it.
Fascinating ✅💯