I don't want to cast the central concern as trivial, because it's real, BUT, c'mon, "beating China in AI is imperative?" Grow up. To "beat" anybody (and for that matter to have any sort of claim to deserving to "win" anything), you would want to "beat China at Not-Being-A-Repressive-Dystopia" wouldn't you? Perhaps including "beating China at Not-Using-AI-To-Be-A-Repressive-Dystopia?"
Microsoft president: Orwell’s 1984 could happen in 2024
111–120 of 182 posts
Re: Microsoft president: Orwell’s 1984 could happen in 2024
#112My personal version of 1984 is someone smashing random quotes from 1984 into my face, forever. Has nobody seriously read another book in the last few decades? And Microsoft's president even gives us a stereotypically shoddy reading of the book > "You know the fundamental story…was about a government who could see everything that everyone did and hear everything that everyone said all the time. " The actually interest…
I disagree. I haven't lived under Stasi but I have lived through Martial Law in Poland in 80s.
Yes, when you have picked up a phone receiver you have been greeted with pre-recorded message that "your call could be recorded", there were tanks on the streets and secret police everywhere.
But more or less you realized that state capacity is quite limited - political police could not practically analyze every recorded phone call of every single citizen. Police could have messed with life or even kill some dissidents and beat or shoot at people during street protests but they were not able to identify every single participant thereafter. In mass of protesters you were safe.
Also you could just leave the system, go into the mountains, find some job and live simple life without being bothered by the state.
This is not an option nowadays. Even democratic state has an abbility to trace every movement of every citizen. You could be traced and fined for every minor offence like traffic, your conversations, your movements are constantly recorded. You are tracked not just by the state but also by private surveilance economy.
And most important it is much harder to just leave a system. Your biometric ID, your banking apps, your credit score, your vaccination proof, your health records, your smartphone will follow you to the most remote in the country.
Re: Microsoft president: Orwell’s 1984 could happen in 2024
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
AI is as much a threat to democracy as the newspaper is - they eventually become the only means of input and politicians adapt to catering to them so that they can remain on a level playing field in terms of getting their policies and (potentially sensational) messages to people.
The issue is that AI is going to make it even more economical to bombard your target with coherent information through an extremely effective means of influence (writing). Have you seen some of the posts recently about AIs getting better at writing?: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27032828 It’s much more of a threat than a bogus newspaper. I can imagine a future where the signal is even more drowned out by nois…
“Early in the Reticulum[Internet]—thousands of years ago—it became almost useless because it was cluttered with faulty, obsolete, or downright misleading information,” Sammann said.
“Crap, you once called it,” I reminded him.
“Yes—a technical term. So crap filtering became important. Businesses were built around it. Some of those businesses came up with a clever plan to make more money: they poisoned the well. They began to put crap on the Reticulum deliberately, forcing people to use their products to filter that crap back out. They created syndevs[Computers] whose sole purpose was to spew crap into the Reticulum. But it had to be good crap.”
“What is good crap?” Arsibalt asked in a politely incredulous tone.
“Well, bad crap would be an unformatted document consisting of random letters. Good crap would be a beautifully typeset, well-written document that contained a hundred correct, verifiable sentences and one that was subtly false. It’s a lot harder to generate good crap. At first they had to hire humans to churn it out. They mostly did it by taking legitimate documents and inserting errors—swapping one name for another, say. But it didn’t really take off until the military got interested.”
“As a tactic for planting misinformation in the enemy’s reticules[networks], you mean,” Osa said. “This I know about. You are referring to the Artificial Inanity programs of the mid–First Millennium A.R.”
“Exactly!” Sammann said. “Artificial Inanity systems of enormous sophistication and power were built for exactly the purpose Fraa Osa has mentioned. In no time at all, the praxis[technology] leaked to the commercial sector and spread to the Rampant Orphan Botnet Ecologies. Never mind. The point is that there was a sort of Dark Age on the Reticulum that lasted until my Ita [IT Department] forerunners were able to bring matters in hand.”
“So, are Artificial Inanity systems still active in the Rampant Orphan Botnet Ecologies?” asked Arsibalt, utterly fascinated.
“The ROBE evolved into something totally different early in the Second Millennium,” Sammann said dismissively. “What did it evolve into?” Jesry asked.
“No one is sure,” Sammann said. “We only get hints when it finds ways to physically instantiate itself, which, fortunately, does not happen that often. But we digress. The “functionality of Artificial Inanity still exists. You might say that those Ita who brought the Ret[Net] out of the Dark Age could only defeat it by co-opting it. So, to make a long story short, for every legitimate document floating around on the Reticulum, there are hundreds or thousands of bogus versions—bogons, as we call them.”
“The only way to preserve the integrity of the defenses is to subject them to unceasing assault,” Osa said, and any idiot could guess he was quoting some old Vale aphorism.
“Yes,” Sammann said, “and it works so well that, most of the time, the users of the Reticulum don’t know it’s there. Just as you are not aware of the millions of germs trying and failing to attack your body every moment of every day.”
—Neal Stephenson, Anathem
Re: Microsoft president: Orwell’s 1984 could happen in 2024
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me the fundamental story was about class. All of the principles of Ingsoc were intentionally crafted as a way to prevent the middle class from deposing the high class with the assistance of the low class. The surveillance, propaganda, double think, cult of personality, eternal wars, Newspeak, etc, were all just a means to that end. That's the boot stamping on the face forever. I think a lot of people skip over Em…
Especially since, with his history in the party and his Jewish name, he's clearly supposed to be a reference to Trotsky. Orwell fought in a Trotskyist militia in Spain and hence is likely to use a Trotsky stand-in to express his own views.
Re: Microsoft president: Orwell’s 1984 could happen in 2024
#115(It's already happening in current times;) China recently made a movie star apologize in public, to say effectively, 'Taiwan is not a country'. I don't care what the name is, but that island just a little bit off the coast of the big country known as China, should be recognized by the UN and member nations as a sovereign nation.
China has 1B people, it's a huge market, and out of the choice to keep is own brand in good standing there, he changed his tune. It was in effect a self-serving corporat4e act.
Yes, it's complicated, but they didn't 'make him'.
It's scarier when Hollywood tows the CCP party line, in addition completely ignores issues such as Tibet etc. for fear of reprisal. Other corps do it as well.
Re: Microsoft president: Orwell’s 1984 could happen in 2024
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
To play a bit of devil’s advocate, “beating China at Not-Being-A-Repressive-Dystopia” requires ensuring China’s influence in the world is minimized or contained. It’s hard to beat them if they take over, in other words. (Note that this also requires defeating the same kinds of forces domestically.)
But isn't that begging the question? Couldn't we just as easily say "beating China at not starting the zombie apocalypse" requires ensuring China doesn't invest in weird chemical experimentation with death and voodoo? We're taking as a given that China's end state is a repressive dystopia, just as we would have to take as a given that China would start a zombie apocalypse. The only difference in one is seen as patent…
Re: Microsoft president: Orwell’s 1984 could happen in 2024
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
To play a bit of devil’s advocate, “beating China at Not-Being-A-Repressive-Dystopia” requires ensuring China’s influence in the world is minimized or contained. It’s hard to beat them if they take over, in other words. (Note that this also requires defeating the same kinds of forces domestically.)
But isn't that begging the question? Couldn't we just as easily say "beating China at not starting the zombie apocalypse" requires ensuring China doesn't invest in weird chemical experimentation with death and voodoo? We're taking as a given that China's end state is a repressive dystopia, just as we would have to take as a given that China would start a zombie apocalypse. The only difference in one is seen as patent…
Re: Microsoft president: Orwell’s 1984 could happen in 2024
#118I think it's important to note here that new technologies that have the potential for oppression can be used not only by authoritarian governments but by liberal-democratic ones as well (see: CIA programs, Snowden leaks, etc) and private companies.
Authoritarianism and democracy are not mutually exclusive.
Re: Microsoft president: Orwell’s 1984 could happen in 2024
#119Re: Microsoft president: Orwell’s 1984 could happen in 2024
#120My personal version of 1984 is someone smashing random quotes from 1984 into my face, forever. Has nobody seriously read another book in the last few decades? And Microsoft's president even gives us a stereotypically shoddy reading of the book > "You know the fundamental story…was about a government who could see everything that everyone did and hear everything that everyone said all the time. " The actually interest…
I think the stasi world was actually more terrifying than an AI eye in the sky. Because you couldn't trust anyone, not your friends or family. Everyone was part of a big network out to get you, so you were sort of locked in your own head. The more realistic fear for me is ending up in a cyberpunk dystopia where the world is run by 3-4 big corporations. Which is ofc not something they like to bring up.
More similar to someone in the west offering their thoughts on Israel or Palestine. There are consequences for your ongoing standing in society, or ability to have any standing in society, no matter whether your own government is involved in those consequences or not.