jackphilson

Yeah, AI seems like a good shift in "narrative making." It's easy to ask AI "give me an efficient way to "confirm or deny this narrative" and have something like this go viral. This is good because it makes narratives more truthful

One requires you to trust a human and the other requires you to trust mathematics.

But who is getting celebrated? The people who spent a lot of time on the original thing, or the AI rewrite that everyone now uses?

It's pretty ergonomic to agents. Like typescript.

It's the old game that he's trying to preserve. It's time to move on to the new game. When the landscape shifts beneath you, its very low probability that the existing structures on the landscape are a good fit for the new landscape, and the structures on the new landscape must be rethought from first principles.

because the social media sites that do will outcompete once people get personal AI coaches that tell them to use technology that is better for them.

School should be this, but applied to literally everything. Ideally with AI generating it all.

What is your take on the optimal usage of AI, and why would it not be N + 1? I think the article is largely correct here.

Interesting example on how I envision software to evolve in the future because massive abundance caused by AI. Massively composable and interoperable.

Triangle kind of reminds me of the Bermuda Triangle. You know how many people died there?

not derailing, just pointing out effective ways of producing good which is what i was responding to. i think its good for people to be aware of this. those people are all examples of people who have influenced culture for bad. you can do it for good: bryan johnson, civil rights leaders, leftist streamers. andrew tate was just the most effective, recent, and obvious one which is why I pointed him out.

I mean just an example. He obviously wasn't the most ethical person. Depends how you do it

Regulations can often be bad for progress so a CBA is probably best. Doesn't matter about the framing.

I suppose you would need to weigh the utility points lost from people no longer enjoying their jobs with the positive utility points gained by the consumers of products and services.

My intuition is that with the law of leverage in mind, the former would be relatively low and the latter would be relatively high.

It is of course up to the government and culture to minimize the former and maximize the latter.

for fear of being overly utilitarian here its not really an issue that people are manipulatable but that they are manipulated into doing the wrong things (consumerism, political divide-and-conquer strategies)

and rejecting manipulation from a deontological stance reduces agency and output for doing good in the real world

manipulation = campaigns = advertisements = psyops (all the same, different connotations)

I would recommend talking out loud to it with speech to text software, it has been pretty helpful for me. Like around 60s of talking.

It was a compliment and I was hoping to nudge the behavior of other HN comments.

Irrelevant but I like this pattern of using Gemini (or AI outputs in general) as sources. Please continue to do so and I encourage any readers to also adopt this pattern. I will also try to implement this pattern.

Right, what I am saying is an AI powered ad blocker essentially. Because some ads are good and mutually beneficial.

Right. I think ai on the user's side is going to be necessary soon. Then they can negotiate with the advertiser's AI to determine what to show. This will need to be on the platform level or the hardware level.

This solves the problem of seeing ads that are not best for the user.

I just find it interesting how any new data added to this past the year 2023 is probably unusable

The solution is for our government to onboard us onto the internet economy like China is doing. Rather than slow down tech advancement.

I often like to just talk out out. Stream of thought. Gives it full context of your mental model. Talk through an excalidraw diagram

Hi. Thanks for this. What is your goal of doing so? From a business standpoint. Or is it purely altruistic?

Well, we have it mildly solved on the internet layer (hackernews). Issue is these bonds aren't very strong because they're not supported by physical space (can't use evolutionary hardwiring). This is why I think network states are good because they're a projection of community on the internet layer onto the physical layer. I think community is very important, and the world will tend more and more towards happiness (generally speaking), so the resurgence of community living I think is inevitable. I think the atomization is a temporary blip caused by increased convenience (tiktok, amazon).

I think the characterization of a community as an angler fish has some merit but might be a little pessimistic. In any case, it's way better than interacting with people who you know are definitely not your community.

Right. I feel like cultural fit is very important. You need to find the community you're most aligned with (share same memetic space) and go to them. This is why I think network states will succeed

Sure

Sounds like you've identified a pretty good market opportunity to fix it.

Why make irrelevant content?

Why do you agree? I think we should outsource as much as we can to abstraction. We've been doing it forever.