zbyte64

The issue is the term is meaningless if it isn't grounded in history. If it simply means "the system you live in" then it says nothing of how it came to be and what can come after.

And if we had universal healthcare it would actually be cheaper to produce those cars. Canada is proof of this.

These chuds probably think it's straight if they are fucking a man who is trans. So you might be on the money for this one

Cthulu is an archetype, right? Comes into our world with no regard other than what it can manipulate and drives people insane.

Edit: thinking about it, it's not an archetype when it comes from an LLM. The consistency it does display doesn't come from some conviction an entity should be a certain way. Ask an LLM to put an archetype in a novel situation and it falls back to matching forms.

This isn't about "disagreeing with people " so much as tolerating intolerance .

You could say the same of history if you know nothing about it

The left is rooted in mass politics, not individual heroics.

Brb, asking my cai if it can justify para social violence as well

I appreciate the emphasis on conviviality or human centric design. But boy I want to nitpick on the following:

when we collaborate with AI systems, we might be interfacing with the archetypal patterns that have guided human wisdom throughout history. This makes programming with AI a form of accessing collective spiritual wisdom rather than just advanced tooling.

I agree with the first half, that yes, you are engaging with archetypal patterns that is often present in human wisdom but that is where it stops. There is no guarantee the LLM has selected the appropriate pattern for your use case. There is no wisdom from the LLM because there is no conviction from its choices. The LLM, at best, is a superstitious machine that sees that X pattern worked in a situation with similar signifiers. Wisdom is understanding which signifiers are of consequence given your context, which requires being able to ignore/forget irrelevant context - something an LLM is terrible at doing as evident by all the "context engineering" tools that exist. It feels like a chicken and egg problem where in order for the LLM to "get right" what is the appropriate context it must first have the appropriate context.

"Oil unable to navigate Trump's Strait"

"Ships lost trying to cross Trump's Strait"

I think if I said this enough times I would likely say "Trump's taint", it kinda ryhmes

The founders revolted because it was profitable to not pay taxes to Britian. And they told the working class the Brits wouldn't let them take Indian land.