From my reading it seems at this time we do not have agreement on how to define & fully describe the nature of human consciousness. So I’m curious how did you assess the AI’s intelligence when we have difficulty assessing the nature of our own? btw, given our current situation, this is genuine curiosity not hostility. Thank you.
Thanks for your question, John! (And no need to reassure me, I try to assume commentators are commenting in good faith.) Opining on either human or artificial intelligence soon gets very Philosophy 101 seminary, but the relevant point with claims adjusting is that AI can process an enormous amount of data extremely quickly. For instance, as the insurtech CEO showed me, it can compare one picture of a damaged car to hundreds of thousands of other images of damaged cars and recognise any patterns that emerge (because, for instance, somebody has photoshopped their licence plates on an image they've got off the internet). No humans – even the most intelligent ones – can do that.
Henderson’s idea of luxury beliefs is in itself the exact same simplification he accuses these believers of having.
Take for example police and prison abolition. Yes these are the goals of the movement but nowhere near the starting point. They seek to make these things unnecessary by restructuring society.
Why name the movement after such lofty goals? The same way nobody called their Everest attempt Base Camp. You keep your eye on the prize and stay aligned toward the goal.
The victims of the white collar apocalypse certainly have an interest in limiting the power and demilitarization of law enforcement. Cops are the people that will be crushing their dissent when they express it. They will have an interest in the human rights of Palestinians, because their human rights will be just as precarious when they try to take power back from the tech sector.
Yes, by God: "Will right-thinking artists, academics and journalists still be quite so keen to casually hurl charges of racism around when they’re no longer working artists, academics and journalists?"
I was a print journalist for 30 years. I have a journalism degree from a state school. I am working class, live in a red area of a blue state, and scratch hard to survive. I still care about things like racism even though my job as editor of a small-town daily ended almost exactly a decade ago.
I never made any money (was paid less than $20 per hour running a newspaper) and God knows I make far less now freelancing and writing a Substack about income inequality here. (Untrickled. Check it out.)
Listen, I understand the MAGA mind. I understand it VERY WELL. I grew up around those people and I still live in an area teeming with MAGAts. I don't need to understand them better -- they need to understand libs like me better. Half of them can't see a doctor or buy food without assistance! We're fighting to better their lives and in return they accuse us of being lazy freeloaders.
Look, I do not give a fuck about their faith or their love of flags. That's their choice. We have freedom of religion and speech, and they can worship as they please and wave any flag they please.
I care about human rights, the rule of law, democracy, income inequality and the environment. I want to build a world where everyone of every race, faith, income level, orientation and however else you want to categorize people can live a life of dignity. And I am TOTALLY SICK AS FUCK of being vilified for wanting this.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Michelle. Aside from the fact I'm Australian and have essentially been professional-managerial class from birth, our life experiences don't sound that dissimilar. I do sometimes feel for my fellow PMCers, who have, especially since 2016, often been vilified and caricatured. But then I remember members of my class have spent the last half century culturally sneering at deplorable MAGA types while offshoring their jobs and importing vast numbers of legal and - especially in America's case – illegal immigrants to drive down wages in industries such as construction.
As Brooks noted, those members of the PMC who do want to do something about income/wealth inequality – rather than just endlessly virtue signal – aren't going to get anywhere until they drop the snooty, morally superior attitude.
My beef with luxury beliefs is that the people who hold them have minimal real influence over society and politics . Who cares about what some socialite thinks about marriage . For example. It’s a simplistic take on how elites somehow have this societal super power. And these hyper woke scolds are being rejected right and left. I doubt if a claims adjuster is a class that is the envy of society dude 😆
Hmmm, interesting argument. I'll grant you that claims adjusters – and a host of unglamorous other white-collar roles – have little cultural power. When it comes to socialites, it's a little more complicated. (See more here, if you are interested - https://www.amazon.com.au/RADICAL-CHIC-MAU-MAUING-FLAK-CAS/dp/0312429134).
If you're making the point that, ultimately, it's the plutocrats and not the secular priestly caste who get their way, I agree. I suspect if the plutocrats hadn't been so keen on the free flow of capital, goods and labour over the last 45 years, the PMC wouldn't have been so correspondingly cosmopolitan and post-national. But artists, academics and journalists do play a significant role in in policing the boundaries of the Overton Window.
AI will enhance and not replace people . Interact with it for a few hours and you’ll see how fragile and limited it really is 😆
I interact with it for a few hours a day and I usually come away at unsettled by how brute force intelligent it is. But maybe that's just me. (See more here, if you are interested - https://precariatmusings.substack.com/p/when-ai-reduces-the-value-of-your)
From my reading it seems at this time we do not have agreement on how to define & fully describe the nature of human consciousness. So I’m curious how did you assess the AI’s intelligence when we have difficulty assessing the nature of our own? btw, given our current situation, this is genuine curiosity not hostility. Thank you.
Thanks for your question, John! (And no need to reassure me, I try to assume commentators are commenting in good faith.) Opining on either human or artificial intelligence soon gets very Philosophy 101 seminary, but the relevant point with claims adjusting is that AI can process an enormous amount of data extremely quickly. For instance, as the insurtech CEO showed me, it can compare one picture of a damaged car to hundreds of thousands of other images of damaged cars and recognise any patterns that emerge (because, for instance, somebody has photoshopped their licence plates on an image they've got off the internet). No humans – even the most intelligent ones – can do that.
Henderson’s idea of luxury beliefs is in itself the exact same simplification he accuses these believers of having.
Take for example police and prison abolition. Yes these are the goals of the movement but nowhere near the starting point. They seek to make these things unnecessary by restructuring society.
Why name the movement after such lofty goals? The same way nobody called their Everest attempt Base Camp. You keep your eye on the prize and stay aligned toward the goal.
The victims of the white collar apocalypse certainly have an interest in limiting the power and demilitarization of law enforcement. Cops are the people that will be crushing their dissent when they express it. They will have an interest in the human rights of Palestinians, because their human rights will be just as precarious when they try to take power back from the tech sector.
Excellent article that has distilled many of my own thoughts on the matter and its why I am extremely pro AI.
I can't tell if you're half-trolling or not, but thanks!
This is the other half.
In that case, I'm fully grateful rather than just half-pleased.
Yes, by God: "Will right-thinking artists, academics and journalists still be quite so keen to casually hurl charges of racism around when they’re no longer working artists, academics and journalists?"
I was a print journalist for 30 years. I have a journalism degree from a state school. I am working class, live in a red area of a blue state, and scratch hard to survive. I still care about things like racism even though my job as editor of a small-town daily ended almost exactly a decade ago.
I never made any money (was paid less than $20 per hour running a newspaper) and God knows I make far less now freelancing and writing a Substack about income inequality here. (Untrickled. Check it out.)
Listen, I understand the MAGA mind. I understand it VERY WELL. I grew up around those people and I still live in an area teeming with MAGAts. I don't need to understand them better -- they need to understand libs like me better. Half of them can't see a doctor or buy food without assistance! We're fighting to better their lives and in return they accuse us of being lazy freeloaders.
Look, I do not give a fuck about their faith or their love of flags. That's their choice. We have freedom of religion and speech, and they can worship as they please and wave any flag they please.
I care about human rights, the rule of law, democracy, income inequality and the environment. I want to build a world where everyone of every race, faith, income level, orientation and however else you want to categorize people can live a life of dignity. And I am TOTALLY SICK AS FUCK of being vilified for wanting this.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Michelle. Aside from the fact I'm Australian and have essentially been professional-managerial class from birth, our life experiences don't sound that dissimilar. I do sometimes feel for my fellow PMCers, who have, especially since 2016, often been vilified and caricatured. But then I remember members of my class have spent the last half century culturally sneering at deplorable MAGA types while offshoring their jobs and importing vast numbers of legal and - especially in America's case – illegal immigrants to drive down wages in industries such as construction.
As Brooks noted, those members of the PMC who do want to do something about income/wealth inequality – rather than just endlessly virtue signal – aren't going to get anywhere until they drop the snooty, morally superior attitude.
My beef with luxury beliefs is that the people who hold them have minimal real influence over society and politics . Who cares about what some socialite thinks about marriage . For example. It’s a simplistic take on how elites somehow have this societal super power. And these hyper woke scolds are being rejected right and left. I doubt if a claims adjuster is a class that is the envy of society dude 😆
Hmmm, interesting argument. I'll grant you that claims adjusters – and a host of unglamorous other white-collar roles – have little cultural power. When it comes to socialites, it's a little more complicated. (See more here, if you are interested - https://www.amazon.com.au/RADICAL-CHIC-MAU-MAUING-FLAK-CAS/dp/0312429134).
If you're making the point that, ultimately, it's the plutocrats and not the secular priestly caste who get their way, I agree. I suspect if the plutocrats hadn't been so keen on the free flow of capital, goods and labour over the last 45 years, the PMC wouldn't have been so correspondingly cosmopolitan and post-national. But artists, academics and journalists do play a significant role in in policing the boundaries of the Overton Window.