Maybe stop ignoring entire fields of research that, to this date, are still figuring out what biological brains are doing and how they are doing them instead of just nodding along to what you already want to believe from people that have blinders for anything outside of their field (computers, in this case).

Well first, brains aren't the only kind of intelligent biological system but they aren't actually trying to 1 for 1 recreate the human brain, or any other brain for that matter, that's just marketing. The generative side of LLM's is what gets the focus in the media but it's really not the most scientifically interesting or what will actually change that much all things considered.

These systems are absolutely fantastic at finding real patterns in chaotic systems. That's where the potential lies.

It's like if people were trying to develop rocketry to achieve space travel, but you and yours were smugly stating that this particularly sharp knife will cut the heavens open, just you wait.

More like trying to go to the moon with a Civil War era rocket, it is early days yet. But progress is insanely quick.

I do think people here have a tendency to just hate all of it out of hand, which I get to some extent.

Yeah the hype cycle is certainly annoying. As is the accompanying fire/re-hire at lower pay cycle that follows any automation.

ignoring the fact that it can render pretty amazing looking videos in such a short time span.

I actually think the generative aspect of neural networks is the least interesting/useful/innovative/etc. Though it will admittedly be more interesting when an LLM can say, use blender to make a video rather than just wholesale generating it. Or at least generate the files/3d models necessary to have it be edited by a person just like they would anything else. I suspect there will have to be a pretty significant architecture change for them to be able to make convincing/coherent movie-length videos.

Chaotic system control, like they're doing with nuclear fusion plasma is the most interesting, to me anyway.

To expand on that for people who think it's all just smoke and mirrors. I think, just like the assembly line, work places will be reorganized to facilitate the usefulness/capabilities of LLM's and, perhaps more importantly, designed to obviate their weaknesses.

It's just that people are still figuring out what that new organization will look like. There hasn't been a Henry Ford type for LLM's yet (and hopefully won't be a Nazi this time). Obviously there's no guarantee there will be such a person/organization but I don't think it super unlikely either.

You sure Freud isn't haunting you?

The dynamics of capital. It's a given, which is why I caveated it with 'if they continue capital accumulation'.

Could they be nicer about? Perhaps, but that would be due to technological development allowing them to carry out their exploitation with less direct violence, not because they are somehow morally superior for having been colonized. Just as the American Empire is/was less brutal than the British.

China did not industrialize on the basis of a colonial empire

It didn't industrialize directly from a colonial empire, yes. However the capital that flowed into it certainly was, if China had not opened itself up to foreign capital it would not have industrialized anywhere near as fast as it did.

since the south will eventually get richer despite colonialism

Until they saturate their markets and start to look outside their borders for new markets.

while the north will struggle because it doesn't know how to develop without colonialism

Colonialism is a product of capitalism, if you got rid of the entire global north but let the global south continue capital accumulation they would recreate colonialism, by necessity. No one knows how to develop without colonialism because no one knows how to develop without capitalism.

World systems theorists being methodologically nationalist, quelle surprise.

To be clear I'm sure their findings are close to the truth anyway but it just shows the limitations of the data/approach, like in what world is Singapore in the 'global south'. But that's on the data collectors.

But even disregarding that, including China in the 'global south' post 2008 is patently ridiculous. I really want to see what these percentages would say if China was included in the 'global north'.

Okay fair I missed that part. Still doesn't change the physics though.

Except they haven't actually demonstrated anything, there were a bunch of startups and others in the west who have done this same 'demonstration' before concluding (rightly) that it wasn't worth pursuing. Socialism doesn't change physics, it's still a stupid idea. Just because some group in China is now on the grift doesn't change that fact.

I'm converting to PMC Maoism.

I love (by which I mean hate) how 'purity test' has just come to refer to having any uncompromising moral position whatsoever.

Again it's one of those cliche situations of the left wants to not kill Palestinians and the right wants to kill all of them and liberals are like, "but you gotta compromise to get what you want ..."

Though hearing the Biden superpacs are focusing almost entirely on digital stuff makes me hope that most of these are just shills, even the downvoting is inconsistent, like the horde missed some comments or misinterpreted some of the commenters to think they're pro-lib when they're not. Very strange either way.

Oh it's absolutely pathetic. They should have cut ties with her when she backpedaled her first marginally pro-palestine interview shortly after she got elected (if I'm remembering correctly, could've been before). But the DSA isn't a serious organization so we get this too little too late severing.

File those performative articles of impeachment against Clarence Thomas.

And, "it's what the unions wanted!" about the railroad strike.

But that's the kind of power we lost! How horrible ...

There was one berating the OOP about how, now that they've cut ties with her, the DSA has less power. Like how could they be so stupid as to do that.

Completely missing the point that they never had her 'power' to begin with, I swear people didn't use to be this dumb about politics but here we are ...

Who could've thought that Leigh Phillips would write something like this ... lol. Is he even pretending to be a socialist still?

edit: I don't know how to spell

Oh yeah it wouldn't change a god damn thing, arguing about it would be literally pointless. Same thing as arguing against free-will, either it exists or it doesn't. Debating it is pointless, finding out one way or the other is pointless since in both cases nothing changes.

Fortunately there's a new funny science youtube who also seems to have at least decent if not verging on pretty good politics.

From when I still watched her, Superdeterminism seemed to be her thing. Its a non-theory, totally unprovable. I don't think she's a MOND believer, could be wrong though but either way she's not a cosmologist.

It was the NIF two years ago but it's also not going to be generating power ever, it was just a demonstration/proof of concept.

I'll give it a shot.

1. China can discipline individual capitalists but it cannot discipline Capital (in more vulgar terms, international capital).

2. Since it lacks this capacity China is therefore dependent on Capital cooperating with it to achieve its vision of Socialism.

3. Thus it will not achieve Socialism with its current trajectory.