Avatar
Low Information Voter
a96a35a224402b8075c4da20f0477896afcc3395b6fad63e30a648a8222a6a69
Caution: posts may contain poetic exaggeration, unapproved memes and general silliness. Full Member of the #Capybara Appreciation Society. Unabashed fanboi of kycnot.me. Anarchist. Dad. Interests: #FOSS #machinelearning #tor #brewing #python #anarchy #diy #solar #electronics #decentralisation #linux #bitcoin #monero #offgrid #rightToRepair #progressivemetal #speculativefiction #archeology #space #memes I believe everybody has a right to defend themselves against #Netanyahu, #Gollant and other fascist war-criminals. Not just a right, but a duty; and most of us are not doing our share.

Terrorists may or may not deserve due process.

The real reason they get due process is because you and I deserve due process.

If any government is allowed to kill people outside combat, government officials will use it to kill people they find inconvenient. Maybe theyll bother to plant a weapon a bleeding heart with a camera is around. Maybe they will just brazen it out.

William Roper: “So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!”

Sir Thomas More: “Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?”

William Roper: “Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!”

Sir Thomas More: “Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

Robert Bolt, A Man for All Seasons: A Play in Two Acts

My father used to drive a new car into the ground every four years. I guess he could afford it, but I can't! And a little preventative maintainence goes a long way.

Hit by a tree though, that was seriously unlucky!

28 Nations and the EU Collaborate on AI Safety, Australia Joins US-Led Push for Military AI Norms ( #6202103b , v0.15)

Twenty-eight governments, along with the EU, signed the Bletchley declaration on AI safety, agreeing to collaborate on AI safety research and mitigate the risks posed by AI. The declaration emphasizes the need for AI to be safe, human-centric, trustworthy, and responsible. The summit was hosted by the UK government, and UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak expressed the importance of developing AI in a safe and responsible manner. The declaration specifically highlights the risks posed by large language models and calls for global consensus on addressing these risks. The summit included political leaders from both developed and developing countries, who spoke about inclusivity and responsibility. The next gatherings are scheduled to be held in Korea and France. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong emphasized the need for countries developing and deploying 'frontier AI' to cooperate for mutual security, despite competition. He highlighted the importance of understanding ethical AI and ensuring that AI systems are imbued with human context and values. The inaugural global AI safety summit, organized by the UK, saw the participation of world leaders who discussed the potential risks and opportunities of advanced AI systems. Singapore and the UK have previously agreed to engage on and influence international standards for emerging technologies, including AI. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz is reportedly considering turning down his invitation to a major UK summit on artificial intelligence. The summit, scheduled for November 1st, is aimed at bringing together tech leaders, academics, and political figures to discuss AI safety. The agenda will focus on addressing future threats posed by the rapidly evolving technology, including cyber security. Scholz's potential absence raises questions about the significance of the summit and the role of international collaboration in AI development. UK tech founders have called on the government to take 'bold action' to cultivate the artificial intelligence startup ecosystem ahead of the AI Safety Summit at Bletchley Park this week. Founders Forum Group, which now includes Tech Nation, brought together a group of AI founders to publish an open letter calling for action to help the UK become a global leader in AI. Meanwhile, the government revealed details of several initiatives to boost national skills in AI, including naming the locations and research focus of a further 12 new UKRI Centres for Doctoral Training in the development and application of AI. The UK's AI Safety Summit aims to position the country as a leader in harnessing and regulating artificial intelligence. The summit will address the risks and potential of AI systems, including their impact on job losses, disinformation, and national security. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak hopes to develop global safety standards during the event, which will convene governments, companies, researchers, and civil society groups. The two-day summit will be held at Bletchley Park, known for its role in cracking the Enigma code during World War II. Vice President Kamala Harris, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni are expected to attend. Executives from leading technology and AI companies, as well as representatives from civil society groups, will also be present. The conference has faced criticism for the absence of key political leaders such as President Biden, President Macron, and Chancellor Scholz. While some governments are moving forward with their own AI laws and regulations, the UK has taken a more hands-off approach, believing that existing laws are sufficient for now. However, the government has announced the establishment of an AI Safety Institute to evaluate and test new models. The UK aims to capture the benefits of AI technologies while implementing necessary safeguards. Frontier AI, the latest and most powerful AI systems, is raising concerns about the potential risks it poses to humanity. The British government, top researchers, and major AI companies are calling for safeguards to protect against these risks. British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is hosting a two-day summit on frontier AI, which will be attended by officials from 28 countries and executives from key AI companies. The summit aims to find agreement on the nature of AI risks and propose concrete actions to ensure safe and ethical use of AI. However, skeptics argue that the summit's goals are too low and that regulating AI should be on the agenda. They believe that tech companies should not be involved in drafting regulations as they tend to downplay the urgency and range of harms. The Institute for Public Policy Research warns that self-regulation by the tech industry would be a mistake and that government supervision is necessary. The summit reflects the UK government's eagerness to show its leadership on the world stage after Brexit. China, the other world AI power, has been invited to the summit. The paper signed by influential researchers calls for governments and AI companies to spend a third of their R&D resources on ensuring safe and ethical use of AI. The summit has been criticized for its narrow focus on frontier AI and for marginalizing communities and workers affected by AI. Overall, there are concerns that not enough is being done to address the risks posed by cutting-edge AI.

Australia has joined a global push for the responsible use of artificial intelligence (AI) in military operations. The country has signed a declaration with 30 other nations, committing to applying AI guardrails in weapons systems. The non-binding declaration establishes a set of norms for the responsible development, deployment, and use of military AI capabilities that align with international law, particularly humanitarian law. The updated version of the declaration includes ten non-binding principles, such as the requirement for senior officials to oversee the deployment of military AI capabilities and the need for personnel to be trained in understanding the capabilities and limitations of AI systems. The declaration has been endorsed by 32 nations, including the US, UK, France, Germany, and Japan. Notably absent from the US declaration are China and Israel, despite signing the Bletchley Declaration. Australia's Deputy Opposition Leader, Richard Marles, described the statement as an important development and emphasized the need for a human-centered focus in AI deployment. He also highlighted the importance of building safety into AI at an early stage.

#AIsafety #AIecosystem #startupinnovations #globalcollaboration #standards #trustedAImodels #GPAI #workforcedisruption #privacy #non-criminalharms #weaponizationofAI #criminalizationofAI #globalconsensus #AIregulation

References:

LOL

China and Russia will defy it.

India will practise its "shocked Pikachu" face for when it gets caught cheating. So will Big Tech.

Its #FOSS that is vulnerable to ancien regime overreach. Time to pull those git repos!

Why We Should Sell Citizenship on eBay

I have a couple of friends and more relatives who are ticket-clippers in visa-mills. Academics, in other words.

The higher education we sell in this country isn't worth a damn compared to good universities in Asia, and is more expensive, but it comes with the promise of a slice of rights to the country's natural resources, and its particular political, administrative and justice systems build up by our ancestors.

People are willing to pay for a slice of the fruit of that, and to get away from the alternative traditions of their homelands. No judgement. My wife did just that, so did many of my friends.

But then they complain that the exact things they paid to leave behind are following them here in record numbers.

"Where does Australia find these people???" an Arab friend once asked me in horror.

"Diluting out" minor shareholders by management recklessly selling new shares is an offence, and company directors have gone to jail for it.

But there are no such consequences for the diluting out of working-class citizens by politicians, by academics, and by abusive and incompetent corporate managers who can't retain local staff and have to depend on "bonded labour" immigrants on temporary visas. The whole system is a ponzi scam, and rife with waste, fraud, sexual coercion and vote-banking. I don't judge the buyers of citizenship, but I certainly judge the (elite, well-connected and treasonous) sellers!

Ancient Byzantium used to recruit its Varangian Guard by essentially selling positions, and citizenship with it. Mediaeval Catholicism was rife with simony, and Early Modern Spain bought and sold basically all government posts. I used to think this was terrible, but I slowly learned the present system in Western countries is nothing more than a wasteful, corrupt, politicised caricature of its ancient equivalents.

An investor's loyalty to his investment is nothing particularly strong or admirable, but it is a stronger attachment to a homeland than the attitudes indoctrinated into new immigrants by the institutions they are required to please. And the present system openly favours criminals, corrupt officials of defeated regimes, and the spoiled children of bribe-sucking bureaucrats, who have the time, the lack of shame, and the contacts required to find the easy (non-education) paths in.

Cut out the middlemen.

End the waste, the corruption, the sexual coercion and the vote-banking. Turn citizenship into an alienable form of property, and allow people to sell theirs on the market IF they have arranged legal residence elsewhere.

If policymakers want to recruit particular types of foreigners, they can offer grants and subsidies to qualifying fireigners to purchase citizenship. Skilled workers, romantic partners, persecuted LGBTIQ2Ss etc etc.

And any local citizen who is willing to sell out probably isn't much of a citizen anyway. I wouldn't sell, but a junkie with a statistical life expectancy of seven years might like to get residence in a cheap-drugs country and move there in return for payment. So might various reverse-Nationalist ideologues of the sort that infest politics and academia.

One in, one out. Win-win.

#controversial #UnpopularOpinion #migration #politics

The tomatoes are a bit weird, I'll grant. Might skip those...

I'm going to vote for the Alexandrine Empire. Brought distant cultures into contact, created new and vigorous ones, and imploded in no more than a generation.

All empires should do that. The imperial equivalent of dying a hero before seeing yourself become the villain.

Genius!

I do like caramelised banana, must try.

(Dives into foxhole)

#UnpopularOpinions

If UBI was more than 50% of the median household's income, then I'd agree with you.

I can't imagine that being the case, however. Typical Western governments' tax takes are no more than 25-50% of GDP, in total. And wars, whores and vanity projects eat before social welfare of any sort.

I want to see obese, spiteful, blue-haired petty tyrants driving for Uber, because UBI gave the policians an alibi for cutting them loose. I daresay UBI will never happen, because the public service is such a powerful vote-buying machine. But it is within the realm of the possible...

1. Build one of these:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion)

2. Use it to ferry materials to build my Orbital Castle of DOOM.

3. Shitpost on #nostr from space, while patting a chameleon.

I agree 100% with your argument, but not with your conclusion.

The present, labrynthine social welfare system already provides the state MORE levers over vulnerable people than #ubi.

Fair call.

I can say from experience that with a woman around (even one their mother's age), I never had to pull any of the guys up for dress, bearing or forgetting to shave. Few stupid pranks, too.

But it was also true that they were less team-oriented with a woman around, and underperformed relative to when there wasn't.

I agree with this, but I also admit it is completely illogical and comes from our culture.

There were a few women who I trained with when I was in, who were good soldiers, and who I would never feel right ordering to stay in safety.

I would also have felt worse seeing them hurt if it came to that, though.

Reading Gary's posts with interest.