The root problem is capitalism though, if it wasn't AI it would be some other idiotic scheme like cryptocurrency that would be wasting energy instead. The problem is with the system as opposed to technology.
If you think that sounds like "Žižekian nonsense", then you obviously don't understand what Žižek argues, because he clearly doesn't say anything silly like "human ideology" (or "Žižekianism", for that matter). The article you posted also does wonders completely breaking down Žižek as an abonimable human being - while not truly engaging with his ideas. It is pretty worthless, takes things deliberately out of context, and, after rigorously defining him as a persona non grata, invests no proper effort to do what actual communists like Marx and Lenin did - acknowledge that even enemies like that can give contributions to understanding, and things to learn from and work at doing so.
Does he sometimes spew bullshit? Absolutely. Does he believe in "human ideology" or spout anticommunism on a worse level than The Black Book of Communism, as the article wants to imply? Only if you deliberately misread and misinterpret him.
Yeah, look, I did read the article, and the article, unlike the person who might very well have done that in their work, did not do that. All I see is the same flipping of materialist analysis into an ideological dogma, that becomes ahistoric, trying to repeat instead of following material developments towards communism. From a quick look at your links, there's even a lot I agree with, especially in criticising the French intellectuals. It still reads like a polemic removed from reality, that values its own farts more than understanding and working towards change, but it has value. And the article you linked in the beginning does nothing, but try to opportunistically recruit people away from one ideologue (which Zizek can definitiely be called) to another idealist "team" that tries to redirect proletarian material interests and analysis. You seem to think it's a contest of who can quote "great people" the best and who can be the most orthodox, which treats it all like a religion instead of a material movement to change the world and mode of production.
In the end, I fear, we will be on other sides of the river, each seeing "their idealist perversions" across from "our materialist analysis", but I at least won't cross the river for your side any time soon.
Nice burn, even brought in the "libertarian", at least be consistent, if I am a Zizekian heretic, I'm not an individualist libertarian who's afraid of authority, I am of course a liberal anticommunist reactionary who won't acknowledge the achievements of "really existing socialism". You strike me as someone who would have written a hit piece on Marx for profiting from British imperialism and his capitalist buddy Engels, citing the letter and his drinking habits to make clear that he is an immature mind, then join some utopian socialist fringe group.
Nah, human ideology is much broader than a single economic system. The fact that people who live under capitalism can't understand this just shows the power of indoctrination.
What you're saying is that you're not self aware enough to realize that you have an ideology. Everyone has a world view that they develop to understand how the world works, and every world view necessarily represents a simplification of reality. Forming abstractions is how our minds deal with complexity.
Do you think people should be treated with respect? Do you think there should be consideration for your condition so you are not exempt from certain events, activities, opportunities?
These are matters of ideology. If you say yes to it, it is ideological in the same way when you say no to it. There is no inherent objective truth to these value questions.
Same for the economy. It doesn't matter if you think that growth should be the main objective, or that equal opportunity should be the focus or sustainability or other things. You will have to make a value judgement and the sum of these values represent your ideology.
Observations may be objective, but the values are always subjective. Two different people can look at the same set of facts and come to entirely different conclusions of what constitutes desirable actions based on their world view.
You entirely missed the point of what I said. Two different people can agree on an objective fact that a table is a table, but disagree on whether it's a good looking table.
Right, but the technology has the system’s philosophy baked into it. All inventions encourage a certain way of seeing the world. It’s not a coincidence that agriculture yields land ownership, mass production yields wage labor, or in this case fuzzy plagiarism machines yield a transhuman death cult.
Careful! Last time I sarcastically posted a stupid AI idea, within minutes a bunch of venture capitalists tracked me down, broke down my door and threw money at me non stop for hours.
Don't worry, they will figure out that without humans releasing gasses they have no purpose, so they will cull most of the human population but keep just enough to justify their existence to manage it.
Although you don't need AI to figure that one out. Just look at the relationships between the US intelligence and military and "terrorist groups".
Don’t worry, they will figure out that without humans releasing gasses they have no purpose, so they will cull most of the human population but keep just enough to justify their existence to manage it.
Unfortunately this statement also applies to the 1%. And the "just enough" will get smaller and smaller as AI and automation replace humans.
I guess you haven't heard they're experimenting with injecting ads right into the videos on the server. Just turning off scripts won't do anything for that.
Sponsor block gives me a nice list of options to do in that case: skip automatically, show a skip button or ignore. All based on what type of interruption there is.
Depending on your country, these ads still need to be marked clearly as such. And for accessibility reasons, that mark will always be machine readable.
They have infinite resources. They're making gestures to dissuade normies. I suspect this will get them most of the result they want. They're also wasting time, effort and resources of adblock programmers (and that is a far more limited resource).
Sure but as long as there is a least one dedicated bearded dude hidden in a dark underground room behind his screen, they will be defeated. No matter how much they spent on the new technology. What I mean is that devs might burn out, they will still be replaced by others. And we get such people faster than youtube is able to burn them out
nah, if they embed the ad into the video stream (they were testing this for some users!), the only adblocking option will be to blank out the screen and wait through the ad (or download the video in advance and edit the ad out automatically), both of which would make it a lot more annoying to adblock than currently.
nope, the ad time varies unlike a sponsor segment, and also youtube would not let you skip through an ad while streaming it, whereas sponsors you can, hence the download and edit out with LLM or whatever algorithm works best
yes, but if youtube only serves you the real video chunks after your client plays through the ad chunks (all in the same media stream to the client), theres gonna be some waiting involved, not like adblocking today where it is instant.
you can skip through sponsor segments, but these are ads from youtube, not from the creator, and youtube will not let you conveniently skip through the ads. if implemented correctly, youtube could ensure that the ad is fully played, which would need downloading and automatic editing to counter.
How would they determine if the ad is played without trusting the client? I guess they could screw with the buffer, but that would really piss of people with poor internet, and most people would prefer an ad-length black screen to whatever attention wrenching dark pattern manipulative brown noise wants to infect your mind today.
That is an interesting question. From what I know, youtube has every video in chunks that they serve to the client, and so server side ad injection is just serving some ad chunks before the video. I think you're right with the buffer thing, it seems to me like the only way to make sure the client can't skip it would be to make the buffer shorter, impacting some people (although seems like only really people with internet thats fast enough for streaming some seconds, but not other seconds, which is an odd catagory)
Ultimately it would be a tradeoff for youtube, but the fact that they put the effort into doing mass testing of the idea at all shows that clearly there are some good incentives, and it may eventually be implemented.
Don't worry, I have been using the powerful technology of "the mute button" and "doing other stuff" since before cable TV existed. We always have alternatives.
This is actually one of very few valid cases for an LLM, to help sponsorblock determine ad segments by analyzing the word choice and speech patterns in segments of the video.
Is Google Chrome fighting uBlock country-specific? I use Chrome on Win 10 with uBlock and haven't seen a YouTube ad outside of the mobile app in ages. For me, uBlock never stopped working in Chrome and I watch YouTube videos every 1-2 days.
I truly hope the new planet of the apes franchise is building to an actual planet of the apes remake. Time traveling astronauts and shattered statue of liberty. I feel like they're already sowing the seeds for human mutants living underground worshipping an unexploded atomic bomb. Man those movies were weird.
Memes
Heiß
Dieses Magazin erhält keine Updates (letzte Aktivität vor 0 Tage(n)).