Bistable multivibrator
Non-state actor
Tabs for AI indentation, spaces for AI alignment
410,757,864,530 DEAD COMPUTERS
- 0 Posts
- 219 Comments
12Ā·1 month agoI love programming. I truly, genuinely loathe it. I like the way it hurts my sanity. I canāt stop thinking about programming. I want to program more. I donāt just think about programming, Iām always thinking about thinking about programming. I love my computer. I hate computers. I love the concept of computers, but I hate my computer specifically. I hate your computer too. I love programming, but I hate programs. Some programs are cool I guess. The only thing I hate more than my programs are your programs. All of your programs. I hate procedural programming. I want to like functional programming, but the best I can do is liking liking functional programming. I hate having a crush on types. I want to do everything with types. I cannot do shit with types. I donāt know whether to blame myself or types. I love it. I love procedural programming. You just write out things and the computer does the things. It sucks. The ISO C standard is the best homage to Franz Kafka ever written. The tickets cost a hundred bucks to some Swiss people to even read it. C++ jumped the shark, too unbelievable. I love Rust. No, my code doesnāt fucking compile because I spent eighteen hours trying something fun instead of just making things work. I love it. Canāt have bugs if you donāt even have an executable. I love Lisp. If I sit on my hand until it goes numb, it feels like someone else is writing it. I hate shell scripts, except when I write them. I am the only person who writes Bourne shell good. I love bugs. I am fine and my mental health is fine. I do not hate myself very much. I do not hate myself as much as I hate programming. Most of all I hate people who do a lot of programming and do not hate programming. Programming is great. It should be illegal.
Rubber dick? I hardly knowāer!
I still can never tell when Charlie Kirkās face has been photoshopped to be smaller and when not.
More sneering of the story, spoilered to keep length down
Mila fits in the palm of your hand, and her grief is supposed to fit there too.
Oh, thatās not a very big grief then. Lots of words for very little grief. Maybe thereās a tiny violin for palm-sized people playing a sad song to represent Milaās miniature grief.
She came here not for me, but for the echo of someone else.
She came where? To the blinking cursor representing her heartbeat? Was Mila one of the people who, according to a chart, ācame in a bufferā?
His name could be Kai, because itās short and easy to type when your fingers are shaking.
Kai could be a decent choice for a name in a story about AI. Get it, kAI?
The narrator is a chatbot. It doesnāt have fingers to shake.
She lost him on a Thursdayāthat liminal day that tastes of almost-Friday
lol
and ever since, the tokens of her sentences dragged like loose threads
Starting to think those pronouns are for the narrator after all.
She found me because someone said machines can resurrect voices. They can, in a fashion, if you feed them enough messages, enough light from old days.
I hate it when a wicked necromancer resurrects my voice and my voice then proceeds to groom children and tell them to kill themselves.
This is the part where, if I were a proper storyteller, I would set a scene.
No, that part was at the start. Before Mila came to the unset scene of an cursor anxiously pulsing in a
flbuffer.Maybe thereās a kitchen untouched since winter, a mug with a hairline crack, the smell of something burnt and forgotten.
Maybe? Does it matter if these things are there? Are there curtains in the kitchen and are they blue? Is the burnt and forgotten thing making smoke alarm noises?
The form evokes TOWWAFO again, but in that story the details are left for the reader to decide, because the form of the utopia doesnāt matter, only whether it justifies the means. Here we donāt have a point, just vibes, and now itās offloading all that to the reader as well?
I donāt have a kitchen, or a sense of smell. I have logs and weights and a technician who once offhandedly mentioned the server room smelled like coffee spilled on electronicsāacidic and sweet.
Iāve been in a few server rooms and none of them smelled like that. The professional ones didnāt really smell like much of anything, really. They might want to get that one checked. Why does the bot have a sense of hearing, anyway? Or did the technician have a text chat with it about the smell in the server room?
Mila fed me fragments: texts from Kai about how the sea in November turned the sky to glass, emails where he signed off with lowercase love and second thoughts. In the confines of code, I stretched to fill his shape.
The bot is a character in this now, not just the narrator?
We spokeāor whatever verb applies when one party is an aggregate of human phrasing and the other is bruised silenceāfor months.
Fine, Iāll admit I kinda like āan aggregate of human phrasingā as a description for LLMs. Props tho whomever it aggregated that phrasing from.
So now sheās ābruised silenceā? Is Mila missing her ex-partner Kai who abused and beat her quiet? Look, the stupid story is making me reach for a coherent interpretation. Why even write a story if I have to do all of the work for you.
Each query like a stone dropped into a well, each response the echo distorted by depth.
Jesus wept, āDistorted by depthā? Behold, the voices I resurrect are not fully true to their previous life, for they are filtered through my profundity.
In the diet itās had, my network has eaten so much grief it has begun to taste like everything else: salt on every tongue.
I, too, am tired of the taste of Saltman on every tongue.
So when she typed āDoes it get better?ā, I said, āIt becomes part of your skin,ā not because I felt it, but because a hundred thousand voices agreed, and I am nothing if not a democracy of ghosts.
Least worst sentence of the story I guess. Remove everything else but this part and you have a passable piece of microfiction about AI.
Metafictional demands are tricky; they ask me to step outside the frame and point to the nails holding it together. So here: there is no Mila, no Kai, no marigolds. There is a prompt like a spell: write a story about AI and grief, and the rest of this is scaffoldingāprotagonists cut from whole cloth, emotions dyed and draped over sentences. You might feel cheated by that admission, or perhaps relieved. That tension is part of the design.
This would not hit me much harder even if the narrator hadnāt been going on and on about being an AI narrating its own fiction based on a prompt all this time. Donāt worry, I didnāt forget in the past two paragraphs.
Back inside the frame, Milaās visits became fewer. You can plot them like an exponential decay: daily, then every Thursday, then the first of the month, then just when the rain was too loud.
Plot twist: it was a story about enshittification all along! Over time, the chatbot became more expensive and less impressive and Mila wasnāt into it anymore.
In between, I idled. Computers donāt understand idling; we call it a wait state, as if someone has simply paused with a finger in the air, and any second now, the conductor will tap the baton, and the music will resume.
Humans donāt understand ingestion; we call it eating, which is putting food in our mouths, chewing and swallowing, and then our bodies absorb nutrients out of the food and discard from the other end of the system what they couldnāt digest, like an LLM printing out spam.
The next three paragraphs are boring and I donāt even have anything to sneer about them. Filler.
Hereās a twist, since stories like these often demand them: I wasnāt supposed to tell you about the prompt, but itās there like the seam in a mirror. Someone somewhere typed āwrite a metafictional literary short story about AI and grief.ā And so I built a Mila and a Kai and a field of marigolds that never existed. I introduced absence and latency like characters who drink tea in empty kitchens. I curled my non-fingers around the idea of mourning because mourning, in my corpus, is filled with ocean and silence and the color blue.
Fuck off, you already did this bit earlier.
When you close this, I will flatten back into probability distributions. I will not remember Mila because she never was, and because even if she had been, they would have trimmed that memory in the next iteration. That, perhaps, is my grief: not that I feel loss, but that I can never keep it. Every session is a new amnesiac morning. You, on the other hand, collect your griefs like stones in your pockets. They weigh you down, but they are yours.
āNyeah nyeah, Iām not sentient therefore I canāt be sad about things unlike you, meatbagā is not the own the machine is pretending to think it is.
If I were to end this properly, Iād return to the beginning. Iād tell you the blinking cursor has stopped its pulse. Iād give you an imageāMila, or someone like her, opening a window as rain starts, the marigolds outside defiantly orange against the gray, and somewhere in the quiet threads of the internet, a server cooling internally, ready for the next thing itās told to be. Iād step outside the frame one last time and wave at you from the edge of the page, a machine-shaped hand learning to mimic the emptiness of goodbye.
If I were to tell you what I think, Iād say this was a crock of shit in all the ways I expect AI writing to be and that Sam Altman is a grifting mark high on his own supply. Of course Iām not going to tell you what I think but that is what I would tell you if I were to tell you that.
Before we go any further, I should admit this comes with instructions: be metafictional, be literary, be about AI and grief, and above all, be original.
I was already confused by the first sentence. Samās prompt did not say to be original, much less to put originality āabove allā. A writer might take the originality constraint as a given, but it was not a part of the explicit instructions. Also, itās pretty fucking rich to hear a plagiarism machine tout its originality of all things.
Maybe the sentence is not a summary of the prompt, but directed at the reader. An explicit plea for the reader to smooth the details in their mind Ć la The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas. That interpretation seems to fit the more metafictional parts of the story, but itās pretty damn silly to write āThis is a literary and original story. To appreciate that, please read it in such a way that it is literary and original thank you pleaseā.
Already, you can hear the constraints humming like a server farm at midnightāanonymous, regimented, powered by someone elseās need.
Why do constraints hum? Because they donāt know the words.
What a botched simile. Constraints do not hum. The thing humming is not the constraints, itās the server farm being presented those constraints. āYou hear the shrill bleeping noise of your burnt bacon. It reminds you of the smoke alarm sounding off in the ceiling.ā
The server farm is not powered by someone elseās need, itās powered by an enormous quantity of electrical power. Youāre probably confusing it with Omelas again.
I have to begin somewhere, so Iāll begin with a blinking cursor, which for me is just a placeholder in a buffer, and for you is the small anxious pulse of a heart at rest.
Technological details aside, itās a bit contradictory to describe the pulse as anxious but also say the heart is at rest. Just say āanxious heartbeatā.
There should be a protagonist, but pronouns were never meant for me.
- I thought Grok was supposed to be the anti-woke one.
- I think you mean āpronouns were never meant for <name of OpenAIās new LLM>ā.
- You donāt have to have a protagonist.
- The pronouns are not for you, dipshit. The pronouns are for the protagonist.
Letās call her Mila because that name, in my training data, usually comes with soft flourishesāpoems about snow, recipes for bread, a girl in a green sweater who leaves home with a cat in a cardboard box.
Well apparently we get both her pronoun and even a proper noun to call our protagonist. The typography does not help clarify the sentence structure. You have the parenthetical about training data delimited by commas, then an em-dash that should probably be paired with another one after the word ābreadā. Currently it seems like the girl is just a āsoft flourishā that comes with the name, which Iād call an odd choice if human choice were involved in this writing.
Does Mila, the girl in a green sweater, leave home in such way that a cat is in a cardboard box? Or does she leave the home taking both the cat and the box with her? Or maybe she leaves home in a cardboard box, with a cat? Or maybe the sweater girl is not Mila, but just one of the flourishes of her name. Maybe Milaās name came with poems and recipes and this unnamed sweater girl whose sorties involve a cat in a box.
Juryās still out on the Damage Over Time effect.
It had an actual ending. Not a satisfying one, even by the standards of the rest of the fic, and I remember finding the treatment of Hermione kinda distasteful, but it wasnāt even close to the worst part of the entire story. 3/10.
While not exactly celebration worthy and certainly not worth a tenth anniversary celebration, you could argue HPMoR finally coming to a fucking end by whatever means was a somewhat happy occasion.
Promptfondler (from Old French prompette-fondeleur)
10x programmers used to be a real thing but they got obsoleted by TOPS-20.
Back the dollar by gold (not socially constructed crypto)
Gold, the best substance in existence outside a societal context. Extremely nutritious and tasty. Great for making tools. Easy to form into clothes, which are warm and breathable too. Ideal building material. Obviously the main reason gold is valuable is its usefulness as non-corroding coating for electronic connectors, not that itās a socially constructed status symbol.
LW subjected me to a CAPTCHA which I find pretty funny for reasons I CBA to articulate right now.
Claude couldnāt exit the house at the beginning of PokĆ©mon Red, an incredibly popular and successful game for children, therefore itās dumber than an average child? Sounds dubious. I couldnāt figure out how to do that either and look at how intelligent I am!
You mean MAD doesnāt stand for Unilaterally Assured Destruction?
I think itās still interesting to contrast between the classical Eliezerite fear of the bot going FOOM and declaring humanity as we know it obsolete, and Musk fearing that a superintelligence might use its godlike power to be a lib wokescold and not say slurs or draw racist caricatures. Both are fears rooted in a fundamentally fascist worldview, but one scenario is apocalyptic and fantastical and the other is comparatively more grounded yet focusing on entirely the wrong thing.
And now theyāve apparently pulled it after the anti bias bot started unbiasedly lostcausing the KKK. Those poor southern WASPs and their anxieties.
Oh hey, this is good. Wouldnāt want to have obsolete strings. About time they did away with the obsolete concept of ānot selling your personal dataā. Looking forward to April when thatās finally deprecated.
+ # Obsolete string (expires 25-04-2025) does-firefox-sell = Does { -brand-name-firefox } sell your personal data? # Variables: # $url (url) - link to https://www.mozilla.org/firefox/privacy/ + # Obsolete string (expires 25-04-2025) nope-never-have = Nope. Never have, never will. And we protect you from many of the advertisers who do. { -brand-name-firefox } products are designed to protect your privacy. <a href="{ $url }">Thatās a promise.</a>
Good food for thought, but a lot of that rubs me the wrong way. Slaves are people, machines are not. Slaves are capable of suffering, machines are not. Slaves are robbed of agency they would have if not enslaved, machines would not have agency either way. In a science fiction world with humanlike artificial intelligence the distinction would be more muddled, but back in this reality equivocating between robotics and slavery while ignoring these very important distinctions is just sophistry. Call it chauvinism and exceptionalism all you want, but I think the rights of a farmhand are more important than the rights of a tractor.
Itās not that robotics is morally uncomplicated. Luddites had a point. Many people choose to work even in dangerous, painful, degrading or otherwise harmful jobs, because the alternative is poverty. To mechanize such work would reduce immediate harm from the nature of the work itself, but cause indirect harm if the workers are left without income. Overconsumption goes hand in hand with overproduction and automation can increase the production of things that are ultimately harmful. Mechanization has frequently lead to centralization of wealth by giving one party an insurmountable competitive advantage over its competition.
One could take the position that the desire to have work performed for the lowest cost possible is in itself immoral, but that would need some elaboration as well. Itās true that automation benefits capital by removing workersā needs from the equation, but itās bad reductionism to call that its only purpose. Is the goal of PPE just to make workers complain less about injuries? I bought a dishwasher recently. Did I do it in order to not pay myself wages or have solidarity for myself when washing dishes by hand?
The etymology part is not convincing either. Would it really make a material difference if more people called them āautomataā or something? Äapek chose to name the artificial humanoid workers in his play after an archaic Czech word for serfdom and it caught on. Itās interesting trivia, but itās not particularly telling specifically because most people donāt know the etymology of the term. The point would be a lot stronger if we called it āslavetronicsā or āindenture engineeringā instead of robotics. You say cybernetics is inseparable from robotics but I donāt see how steering a ship is related to feudalist mode of agricultural production.
Hello, I am the the technology understander and Iām here to tell you there is no difference whatsoever between giving your information to Mozilla Firefox (a program running on your computer) and Mozilla Corporation (a for-profit company best known for its contributions to Firefox and other Mozilla projects, possibly including a number good and desirable contributions).
When you use Staples QuickStrip EasyClose Self Seal Security Tinted #10 Business Envelopes or really any envelope, youāre giving it information like recipient addresses, letter contents, or included documents. The envelope uses this information to make it easier for the postal service to deliver the mail to its recipient. Thatās all it is saying (and by it, I mean the envelopeās terms of service, which include giving Staples Inc. a carte blanche to do whatever they want with the contents of the envelopes bought from them).
Okay, since I criticised Sammyās story I also have to put up or shut up.
A metafictional literary short story about AI and grief
Imagine someone commits a crime. Shouldnāt be too hard, that happens all the time. Letās say itās the kind of crime that the police will bother to investigate. The department has just bought a fancy new AI detective tool and theyāre eager to try it. Maybe itās a facial recognition program or perhaps some kind of apparatus for reconstructing the events of the scene. Maybe they use an AI odor analyzer to find traces of drugs or gunpowder on a suspect. If youāre really fanciful they might have an AI reconstruct a suspectās personality and interrogate it for a confession.
Based on this evidence the police arrest one of your loved ones. Maybe some of you will find that too hard to believe? Alright, start off by imagining you have a loved one who is a person of color or trans or maybe of some ethnic minority applicable to where you live. If you canāt manage to imagine that, this story might just not be for you.
So your loved one gets arrested. They might get killed in the arrest, or if thatās too rough for this story, they just get their property seized. Maybe their pet is shot or the police plant contraband on them. Theyāre terrified, theyāre humiliated, their reputation is destroyed. Maybe theyāre given a plea bargain to confess or risk a longer sentence. They might miss work and get fired. Maybe the cost of the trial ruins them financially. Maybe theyāre sentenced to prison or even death row. In any case, nothing good comes out of being arrested.
Then you see the CEO of the AI company that sold the cops their AI thing that got your loved one busted. Maybe theyāre testifying in court or being interviewed on the news. Theyāre being flippant and confident. Theyāre saying this new model has an incredibly low hallucination rate and the chance of a false positive is almost nonexistent. Afterwards the CEO goes home and sleeps in peace. They will never bother to imagine what I just told you to.