this is like an inverted mandela effect

“what’s ur favorite rutger monologue tears in the rain or babies selling crack”

i think u glitched this into the world, i had no idea it existed. from the trailer the style looks somewhere between mandy and tony scott’s domino, which for me were less “films” than a kind of novel psychoactive drug consumed ocularly. thank u for speaking about “hobo with a shotgun”

Why is context a problem? the context transmutes it. A Drake album is music. A Drake song is music. once clipped and paired with ten million videos for a Drake Song Challenge it has been recombined and transmuted into content. a better example tho closer to what ur getting at is Drift Phonk. I’d argue that the entire genre is content, not music, because nothing else explains why it has hundreds of billions of streams yet the artists can’t tour because no one would come. It is music made for a specific digital context, platform environments with specific physics, it exists for its attentional, affective and memetic utility. it has no social embedding or imaginary like Drake does, it can only exist in digital environments. a true hybrid however would be Brazilian funk, which is engineered both to capture attention and circulate online but also has a rich social embedding, purpose and imaginary. it is a superposition of both that resolves differently in different contexts, which is why it’s both so popular and so avant garde. rather than forcing some black and white binary, i think treating content as a distinct medium makes the current media landscape far less confusing. and it certainly depends on context, mediation, social relationship and imaginary (or lack thereof), and utility.

this gonna be online anywhere? i love ur interviews

why is anyone even concerned about the loss of “quality content,” i personally do not have a single warm memory of a wonderful experience i once had with quality content. content is not films or music or podcasts even if it contains them, because the sole purpose of content is attention and circulation. its like how porn is not cinema because its sole purpose is sexual arousal. the only people whose lives would be worse without either are people who make a living from porn or content. i guess thats like 50 million people or something so maybe i just pwned myself.

content is a medium unto itself no matter what medium it contains. i don’t know how yet but i believe there will eventually be an “outside” for non-content media. a snake can’t eat its tail forever.

my doctor in germany said “hydration” is just a marketing gimmick made up by American Big Drink in the 90s and that americans drink too much water and it’s unhealthy and u should just drink water when ur thirsty. but ripping 0.0% beers whenever u want is a great way to hydrate

I know text isn't conscious lol, I was talking about the limitation of language in describing human experience even to humans. Why would an LLM processing text suggest consciousness? The words only have meaning to us, it has no experiential referent for any of them. But I don't think Sterling will appreciate two people arguing in his @'s lol.

I actually don't understand what language has to do with consciousness. You could write 10,000 books describing in the most granular detail, say, the loss of a parent, and a reader whose parents are alive would still not experience anything close to the feeling of it happening. I've never had a moment of awe, frisson, or ecstasy accompanied by internal narration. My best thoughts arise as feelings first and are translated into language second. Current AI systems are multiple orders of magnitude less complex than a human mind, not to mention reducible to a binary on/off, making them absolutely different on the most essential order. What even suggests consciousness that isn't just the ELIZA effect? Honestly asking what I am missing? When there's hybrid biocomputer / silicon intelligence in a multi-sensory embodied form, I can imagine the conversation becoming more relevant. Sorry to keep reply guying you but the algo keeps putting u in my feed now and I respect your intellect but also disagree on some fundamental things I guess?

yes a probable outcome is a black boxed future where humans live amongst miraculous technology, and an intelligence, we cannot actually understand. it will be no different than an advanced alien species bringing its technology to earth and living among us. i find it interesting that there is very little talk of existential threats from AI in china. as i understand it, they see security and innovation as inextricable; alignment is seen as an engineering problem in a deterministic cybernetic system, and formal verification is not optional. in a way i trust their cosmotechnics more. my main worry is incredibly powerful systems operating with an ontology in which utility and efficiency are the ultimate good, even worse if capital is still the 'master score.' demonic calculations result ie altman's quip that 'it takes a ton of energy to train a human over 20 years.' there's a kind of dissociated nihilism, or misanthropy of embodiment, that chills me to the bone. the sustainability and complexity of organic life must be a higher goal than whatever psychopathic number go up thermodynamic entropy maximization that utilitarian monomaniacs have turned into god for athiests.

i find the whole debate so confusing. seemingly very smart people on both ends of a polar extreme. yet the only explicitly, absolutely 100% stupid positions are 1) thinking ASI + capitalism won’t lead to extinction and 2) thinking it will and this is ok

8 years straight just lectured at mutek

once i asked a pumped-up gay circuit party boy how much he bicep curls and he said “they’re just club muscles they don’t actually do anything” is this left vitalist praxis

set setting type and dose of course matters. can enhance wide or narrow range qualia but can also flatten or decrease it. high QQ is achieved by *accumulated qualia*, usually with strong episodic memories, so some drugs enhance qualia while active but are rather amnesiatic and leave weak memories. benzos, stims, alcohol, cannabis, opioids at low doses can enhance but higher doses lower it. very dependent on degree of memory loss. empathogens are a qualia increaser usually, also dose dependent. low dose dissociatives decrease, but the hole has an intense qualia of its own. low dose psychedelics can increase, high doses overload qualia in a way that is hard to integrate in the QQ scale. ibogaine is a full qualia simulator. all of them have diminishing returns. the ocean is always the best setting. always have a sober friend.

also i am tired of the argument QQ is flawed or doesn't matter when it's obvious low QQ people bring disproportionate risk to society. ppl with low QQ are simply incapable of understanding reality like high QQ ppl, and yet we allow low QQ ppl to influence the direction of our future. QQ is falling fastest in wealthy nations and if this trend continues it could literally lead to extinction.

u have a high IQ ok great but we need to talk more about QQ - qualia quotient - because a lot of high IQ ppl have terrible QQ scores high IQ but u dont notice the amnesia of online time, the impoverishment of ur episodic memory? u have low QQ high IQ but dont see a difference between a jpg of a painting and the real painting? even lower QQ high IQ but willfully exist in a skinner box, one-note stimming with crypto trades and feed refreshes, oblivious u have become a mining rig of meat in a meaningless loop, waking up from the matrix and choosing no pill, because being a human battery without even a simulation of real life is what u know? single digit QQ confirmed

club is nonstop shepard-risset rhythms , we live in the era of eternal accelerando

one came out already or u think one will come out? either way ur right.

im not saying it doesn’t exist. im saying it will be everywhere