Yes. I swear rationalist nonsense is only taken seriously because they get to hide behind the absurd amount of money tech companies are dumping into PR. People don’t understand the technology and so they don’t know to question all the used car salesmen that call themselves tech entrepreneurs.
cecinestpasunbot
It’s not about picking a correct term.
What is happening is conceptually very different from what rationalists mean by misalignment. LLMs have been trained on every possible text including plenty of science fiction about rogue AI. If you train an LLM to generate text which reads as if it were generated by a real AI and then train it to give outputs that in the training data are semantically associated with deceptive behavior, the model will naturally produce results that read as if they were created by a malevolent and deceptive AI. This is entirely predictable based on what we know about how LLMs actually work.
Why not? Based on Iran’s history, I think it’s highly improbably they would use nukes offensively. They have every reason to want to develop a nuke. It’s likely that they even have the capacity to make one. Even then, they’ve refused to. All evidence points to the fact that they genuinely want peace. All of their responses to either American or Israeli attacks have been very limited. Even their allies all seem primarily interested in self defense.
While the government may not be to your liking, having nukes is not going to prevent organic resistance. In fact, having a real deterrent against foreign military intervention ensures that the people of Iran can focus on fighting for their personal freedoms and not their very lives. In the past there have been real protest movements in favor of social reform. Now though? Iranians are demonstrating in defiance of Israel and in support of the Iranian state.
To be clear, I’m not exactly a fan of nuclear proliferation. However, in a world where the only country to ever use nukes as a weapon and their genocidal proxy are aiming to obliterate your country, having a nuclear deterrent makes everyone safer.
This is why I think China’s bet on renewable energy technology, manufacturing, and infrastructure is going to be a major geopolitical advantage for them in the coming years. You can’t conceivably cut China off from the sun, wind, and rain. Their major weakness is still going to be a naval blockade that could cut them off from access to raw materials. However, they’re also addressing that issue as well through various sustainability initiatives and military capacity.
The US however is playing the same old game of trying to control the world’s fossil fuel supply. However, they’ve done nothing to hedge against the inevitability that renewable energy will devalue fossil fuels almost entirely. They’re structurally incapable of doing anything else and it’s going to bite them in the ass.
It could be the business was borderline insolvent and cash from the checks acted as a short term loan from Walmart.
That or he was trying to create the create the illusion of cash flow in order to get the business to qualify for certain kinds of loans. The money from the loans he could subsequently embezzled. Then if the company went bankrupt the creditors would be at a loss.
That’s a pretty classic Marxist understanding of how class conflict actually happens. In response to a crisis a state can either adapt or fall into chaos if it can’t. That’s essentially what happened during the new deal era and the civil war respectively. Although arguably the external threats of WWII allowed the US to adapt rather than fall apart.
I think the line between a liberal democracy and fascism is much blurrier than most people think. I suspect the transition from one to the other, going in either direction, is entirely dependent on how much internal forces threaten the ruling capitalist class.
Right now, I think the US is on the decline but hasn’t yet experienced a crisis which really threatens the power of the capitalist class. Fascists seeking power therefore need to manufacture crises in order to accumulate power. That’s where I think the US is at right now.
However, I’m not sure how well it will really work. Democratic state leaders are effectively demonstrating that the existing law enforcement structures are perfectly capable of violently cracking down on dissent. So if you’re a wealthy capitalist, why would you push your bought and paid for judges and politicians to make Trump president for life? It seems like a needlessly risky move in my opinion.
That said, we can only say that the rich will operate rationally to protect their own interests on average. Individually, they can be wildly erratic like Elon Musk has proven to be. As such, the more wealth is concentrated into fewer and fewer hands, the less predictable the outcomes are.
That would be nice except as it stands Americans are getting pushed out into the pacific to drown. The balance of power between working people and wealthy elites has to shift before any meaningful progress is possible.