Pronk You

Meagan: "Somebody made a great analogy โ€ฆ" - the Timeloop Cafรฉ

Unfortunately, this is a dumbass metaphor. It’s inapt, inept, and inapposite. It makes no sense if you know even the first thing about cognition, the history of galvanism and the fact that several extremely important results were discovered thereby, or that whether or not AI is conscious is not particularly relevant. Conflating “conscious” and “AI” does not make sense, for a whole host of reasons. “AI1” has been the industry-standard term since the 1950s and encompasses many different technologies. I know that to most people AI is new, but it’s not at all novel to those working in computer-adjacent fields2.

This is intellectual stotting. But unfortunately to someone with an actual capable brain like the bad-ass motherfucker writing to you now, it merely seems like an antelope with three left feet glued to a food truck attempting aerial acrobatics. It only impresses co-dumbasses who haven’t read actual books and who do not know the history of anything at all.

The scientific debate in the era of galvanism was not whether or not the dead could be resurrected via electrical stimulation. That was fiction fodder and the equivalent of pop-sci sensationalism at the time, no different than watching the latest space robots movie and concluding that this represents our era’s science. What Galvani actually discovered was that animals possess what he called “animal electricity,” and though he didn’t understand it he believed it was somehow fundamental to how animals function. And he was correct. That insight alone was an important discovery. Involved in the debate was Alessandro Volta who believed that animal systems did not use electrical impulses to operate and that the frog was just detecting something external only.

Attempting to do more research for his side of this scientific dispute, Volta constructed what was called a “voltaic pile” in 1800. This was the world’s first battery. And, folks, if I need to point out how important that was….well, you’re probably on the wrong site.

Ok, y’all, time to pull it on back now. These people are just fundamentally dumb. Their pseudointellectual faux-superiority only impresses those who can’t completely mog them effortlessly. Luckily I can and I make no bones about it.

To think about it from a larger perspective, what is the point of what people like Meagan are doing there? I know, showing off for their also-moronic friends. But in a larger sense, what is the purpose of publicly looking like a dipshit for anyone with eyes to see? I just cannot make sense of covering yourself in ignominy and dishonor this way.

  1. One does not need consciousness to have artificial intelligence.
  2. For instance, I was tweaking AI-based spam filters in the late 1990s, and had a friend who worked on creating them.

Yellow

It’s amusing that it is mind-blowing to Gen Z and younger Millennials that in the past once a year a big book was delivered to your house with everyone’s name, address and phone number in it.

They literally cannot comprehend it.

Go Lun

VB Knives (@Empty_America) / X

The doubters themselves were acting out of fear as they knew AI was real, which made and makes them seem utterly unhinged, which further serves to confirm AI is the real deal.

Bitcoin and cryptocurrency, on the other hand, did not elicit such strangely lunatic philippics and paraeneses, which is one way you could tell they were not that consequential. Only something true and scary makes people go completely mad.

Seaside

That is deeply ok. Not a fan of that style in general. And I do not say this because it’s revealing (women should be able to wear revealing clothes IMO) but it kind of looks like she’s wearing her underwear on the outside.

But mainly, it’s just not goth-y enough for me. Too sunny.

Hair Today, Hopefully Gone Tomorrow

The haircut that Ilene Graff had in this promo shot from Mr. Belvedere was pretty common in the 1980s. And without a doubt, it was one of the worst women’s hairstyles of all time.

She’s the one on the bottom right, if you did not immediately take notice of that hairpocalypse.

IRQ Nightmares

I spent $25 on a bit of nostalgia and will confuse the heck out of some youngsters today.

I spent $25 on a bit of nostalgia and will confuse the heck out of some youngsters today. : sysadmin

That’s right. But if you were lucky enough to have an AdLib sound card back in the day, you could avoid IRQ hell altogether that often came with having a sound card and a modem in the same box. The AdLib didn’t require an IRQ at all. I was not so lucky (my dad was, though), so getting my modem and sound card to play nicely in a new build was always a day of jumper-swapping. Some things certainly are better now.

I truly do not miss IRQ shenanigans.

Diff App

Women typically give terrible, useless advice to men about dating women.

However, men typically give worthwhile advice to women about dating men. Why? I think it’s because men (as the approachers) absolutely must understand women and what they are looking for, while women are under no such obligation. Men come to them; they need to do very, very little.

Was just realizing this dichotomy. Well, life is never fair.

Bubbling

What Sort of AI Bubble Are We In?

This post is wrong, but it is wrong in an interesting way. That is, it posits all these possible future states of AI bubble popping, but begs the question1 by assuming there is a bubble at all. This reminds me of people talking about the “cloud bubble” back in 2013-2016. Well, there wasn’t one. AWS, Azure and others printed money after that “bubble” proved not to be anything of the sort.

And the funny thing is that if this person is correct and the bubble does pop, AI will then be cheaper than it was before. Because that’s what happens when an excess floods the market. See housing post-2008 for a recent-ish example.

Real AI is probably the most useful and efficacious tool we’ve gotten in the computing space since the GUI. At the very least. My guess is that it’ll end up being more consequential than that due to spillover effects.

Oh, by the way, by “interesting” I meant “clownish.” Because that’s what the piece is. Doltish bien-pensant non-thinking.

  1. And I do here mean the original sense of question-begging.