@tetranomos@awful.systems cover
@tetranomos@awful.systems avatar

tetranomos

@tetranomos@awful.systems

“we only recognize the Young-Girl when we eat what we are.” ~ tiqqun

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. For a complete list of posts, browse on the original instance.

tetranomos OP , (edited )
@tetranomos@awful.systems avatar

as someone who observes the interests of theology that has crossed disciplines with computer science, i should only speak from that regard, than as a web developer who puts a dog in the fight of competing styles, insofar as the styles bear ontological commitments. though, obviously the web is suffering in quality due to these dogmatic "software" "engineering" practices, it must be said. there's a wider tendency to advance metaphors which make certain paradigms more attractive to some developers than others based on philosophical prejudices coming from having accepted aristotle's agrilogistic axioms (law of noncontradiction, metaphysics of presence, essentialism). computer science is fundamentally ontotheological, not accidental, and engineers who follow martin are committed to a politicization of the object as more real than what objects are about. their style fails to purposefully and meaningfully ground fundamentally distributed applications, necessarily. someone might contrast martin against authors like brian cantwell smith, to see the orientation from which i speak.

greater still, we're seeing the outcome of what seems like decades of uncritical adoption of practices, what seems more like political movement than properly philosophical argumentation, everywhere in c.s. and wider applications of it.

tetranomos OP ,
@tetranomos@awful.systems avatar

i'd like to think the motivations to think or practice prime our hinge commitments to attune to noopower such that we privatize our lives in spite of the commons. the available motivations, then, would be the actual problems, adoption and qualities of thinking, the symptoms.

bcs's On the Origin of Objects might make your day.

How the Simulation Argument Dampens Future Fanaticism – Center on Long-Term Risk ( longtermrisk.org )

Combined with general model uncertainty, it seems premature to conclude that far-future-focused actions dominate short-term helping. It's likely that the far future will still dominate after more thorough analysis, but by much less than a naive future fanatic would have thought.

@AnarchoNinaAnalyzes posts a near-perfect analysis of what AI actually is ( social.treehouse.systems )

the writer Nina Illingworth, whose work has been a constant source of inspiration, posted this excellent analysis of the reality of the AI bubble on Mastodon (featuring a shout-out to the recent articles on the subject from Amy Castor and @dgerard):...

tetranomos ,
@tetranomos@awful.systems avatar

what i'm trying to understand is the bridge between the quite damning works like Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Myth by John Kelly, R. Scha elsewhere, G. Ryle at advent of the Cognitive Revolution, deriving many of the same points as L. Wittgenstein, and then there's PMS Hacker, a daunting read, indeed, that bridge between these counter-"a.i." authors, and the easy think substance that seems to re-emerge every other decade? how is it that there are so many resolutely powerful indictments, and they are all being lost to what seems like a digital dark age? is it that the kool-aid is too good, that the sauce is too powerful, that the propaganda is too well funded? or is this all merely par for the course in the development of a planet that becomes conscious of all its "hyperobjects"?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines