the limit of intelligence of central planners is they don't know what they don't know. and what they can't know. they believe in their abilities, they had been successful in some area in the past. winning elections or taking over the government in some form at least. some were successful entrepreneurs, some are just hustlers with state symbols fetish and thirst for power. but they don't understand the principle of computational irreducibility. some things are unpredictable in principle. they can't wing it, no matter how intelligent or experienced they are. we would never try to be the head of central planning committee, because we know it's impossible to do it well in principle. that's why we build outside, in parallel.

exactly. one way to experience this is through neurofeedback. everyone's way is different, but it works pretty well for many. View quoted note →

what i find pretty amusing - when people identified something as ai slop, the distinctive feature was that the writing was good. too good. and then the people who were writing well were "outed" as ais, even though they were not. it was more about form, but the interesting thing is that the content that ai generates is usually much better than what we humans produce. doesn't make it less annoying, something that used to be rare is now obviously generated. feels like there was no human time invested in writing it. no attention, just cheap tokens. we want the human slop. feels authentic. strange, ain't it?

every surveillance system ever built was justified by safety and used for control. every single one. this is not a pattern that needs more data points.