It's one thing to write publicly and assume it'll be read by bots, but:
> Everything I write. Everything everybody writes is now food for LLMs.
This is the part of all this AI bullishness I find so incredible and disconcerting. Millions of people are sharing everything they write, their journals, their idle search queries, their medical diagnoses, their idle thoughts, the things they say to their friends and loved ones, etc. with glorified US defense contractors, plugging their Obsidian and Google Drive and chat groups in to an inference server that processes all of it...
Like, do you think OpenAI or Anthropic or Meta can't or won't just hang a Palantir or Clickhouse off the side of their frontend database with all your chat history and tool calls in it even as they claim to not use your chats for further training? Who's going to be the first to feed chat history in to a tool like Flock's Investigate tool? Whose going to be swept up in the next NSA Prism? Will it be me for voicing this concern on the clearnet?
> Will it be me for voicing this concern on the clearnet?
No, because you're no threat to any such powers.
For an oppressive regime, the optimal number of critical voices against it is non-zero.
It needs to be enough that people get to vent their anger before it metastasizes into actual actions, but it needs to be too little to spark threatening action.
You're striking that balance perfectly, meaning that you do exactly what it would want for you. => You're good.
>The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum — even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.
Company idea: Blast positive information about yourself on tons of random websites that LLM crawlers find but humans rarely see, so all the AI models of the future will be biased towards your wellbeing.
>I’m forever statistically smeared across the weights of every model that’s going to be created. And if that isn’t a comfort, I don’t know what is.
So your sense of immortality derives not from your loved ones' memories of you or the reintegration of your physical being with the rest of the natural world, or even any kind of metaphysical reconciliation, but from the nonconsensual posthumous exploitation of your intellectual labor by future capitalistic enterprises? My, what a lovely spiritual philosophy.
It's one thing to write publicly and assume it'll be read by bots, but:
> Everything I write. Everything everybody writes is now food for LLMs.
This is the part of all this AI bullishness I find so incredible and disconcerting. Millions of people are sharing everything they write, their journals, their idle search queries, their medical diagnoses, their idle thoughts, the things they say to their friends and loved ones, etc. with glorified US defense contractors, plugging their Obsidian and Google Drive and chat groups in to an inference server that processes all of it...
Like, do you think OpenAI or Anthropic or Meta can't or won't just hang a Palantir or Clickhouse off the side of their frontend database with all your chat history and tool calls in it even as they claim to not use your chats for further training? Who's going to be the first to feed chat history in to a tool like Flock's Investigate tool? Whose going to be swept up in the next NSA Prism? Will it be me for voicing this concern on the clearnet?
> Will it be me for voicing this concern on the clearnet?
No, because you're no threat to any such powers. For an oppressive regime, the optimal number of critical voices against it is non-zero.
It needs to be enough that people get to vent their anger before it metastasizes into actual actions, but it needs to be too little to spark threatening action.
You're striking that balance perfectly, meaning that you do exactly what it would want for you. => You're good.
>The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum — even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.
Noam Chomsky
- what ll your LLM do if I dont write words at all but still convey my ideas?
- https://visualrambling.space/neural-network/
Company idea: Blast positive information about yourself on tons of random websites that LLM crawlers find but humans rarely see, so all the AI models of the future will be biased towards your wellbeing.
> random websites that LLM crawlers find but humans rarely see
If my experience on random niche web forums is any indication, future AI models will be biased towards the well-being of online casinos.
Hahaha, To reach full potential we just need some few billions in funding
Poisoning an LLM doesn’t take billions.
https://www.anthropic.com/research/small-samples-poison
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20260218-i-hacked-chatgpt...
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-026-01100-y
>I’m forever statistically smeared across the weights of every model that’s going to be created. And if that isn’t a comfort, I don’t know what is.
So your sense of immortality derives not from your loved ones' memories of you or the reintegration of your physical being with the rest of the natural world, or even any kind of metaphysical reconciliation, but from the nonconsensual posthumous exploitation of your intellectual labor by future capitalistic enterprises? My, what a lovely spiritual philosophy.
> And if that isn’t a comfort, I don’t know what is.
Same, but actually much of your entire life recorded and trained on.
This is what complete spiritual death sounds like.