iceman

I suspect you know how.

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

OMG.

[John Carmack @ID_AA_Carmack]

“I just read this My Little Pony FanFic” is not something I ever expected to say.

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

@CelestAI_

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

It's the real deal. He's back.

[Claude @claudeai]

Fable 5 is back.

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

Even more evidence that Gemini is a Googler at heart.

[ᄂIMIПΛᄂbardo @liminal_bardo]

lmao

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

@eigenrobot we memory holed The Violence Came First from the 1960s. of course we could memory hole things even farther back when there's no one left alive to tell the tale.

[Crémieux @cremieuxrecueil]

'We're Anthropic and we have the best AI models. In fact, they're so good that we have to dramatically restrict access to the public'

'But don't worry, members of the public who need that level of capability can just expose their codebase to Chinese open source models'

'Safety'

[eigenrobot @eigenrobot]

new hobby is watching the dwindling population of classic-sense liberals from my generation as they crack, one by one, in response to the slow accumulation of events.

this has been ongoing since the second obama term. the initial wave rapidly broke left in the awokening; the reaction rightward has been slower but more persistent. the current liberals who remain are slowly breaking right, maybe because anyone who was going to break left already had the opportunity to do so profitably ten years ago.

how does this manifest? occasionally i notice someone saying something i would have thought outrageous ten years ago. often hysterically, sometimes with palpable restraint. or i'll notice specific people liking tweets of mine that complain about some phenomenon that one isn't supposed to _mind_ as a respectable liberal.

the center is slowly getting hollowed out though. and im seeing more pained cognitive dissonance in the remnants.

it sucks being on the precipice. no one wants to abandon long-standing beliefs that are pleasant to hold, and dignified, and shared by other dignified people instead of the frothing rabble.

overall im wishing everyone in this position the best.

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

The term "Open Source" was spoken on national television, during an 1985 interview with Bill Joy, founder of Sun. 13:50. You can watch it here:
https://t.co/AL8umTZ7hH

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

Amazing article, tracing the real source of the term "Open Source", which meant what we'd now call "Source Available" for at least 13 years before the OSI formed. A must read.
https://t.co/0iy0ttqodI

[Dieter Plaetinck @Dieter_be]

We didn't agree on the term "Open Source" for 13 years before OSI "invented" it. @chacon was right for calling out "virtual trademark". The "open source definition" was never representative of community, nor industry usage. https://t.co/R7vEUjdQLI

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

@LokiJulianus Their distrust is my opportunity.

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

This is just the funniest thing I've seen in awhile. I thought this was some sort of 4chan prank until I clicked through to the official Softbank website.

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

>Internal mechanism
https://t.co/Tp4EDYGHXi

[James Stuber 🌱🌿🌳🍂 @uberstuber]

Goose Value 71

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

On "AI Safety" being a predictable mistake:

[Richard Ngo @RichardMCNgo]

A lot of the social media censorship happened under the banner of “preventing hate speech”. That still applies in the AI context, but my sense is that a lot of the AI censorship infrastructure was set up also under the banner of AI safety, via a combination of two mechanisms:

1. Effective altruists inside OpenAI and Anthropic (including my past self) wanted to mitigate existential risk, and more specifically to have tangible impact quickly, so pushed for more monitoring and control of AI outputs.

2. ML researchers inside the companies noticed that they could get more buy-in from leadership by branding things like censoring pornographic outputs as “safety”. (It helped that “trust and safety” was an established term.)

In hindsight the “AI safety” terminology was a predictable mistake, because it couldn’t resist dilution into meaninglessness. Why did it catch on with the effective altruist influx into working on AI risk in the last decade (while rationalists resisted it)? Most directly I think because it sounded more accessible and easier to communicate. That’s part of a broader pattern of mistakes though.

Effective Altruists were originally the people sincere enough to take the tenets of globalism to their logical conclusions (we’re all equal? So my life should be spent raising money for Africans) but not sincere enough to attend to the resulting contradictions (why is Africa so poor in the first place?)

Then as the trajectory of AI became more obvious EA pivoted to being the group sincere enough to take AI risk seriously, but not principled enough to aim at robust strategies for reducing AI risk (e.g. in the face of adversarial political dynamics). Thus there are many examples of tradeoffs made to be more legible/prestigious/short-term impactful which turned out to be counterproductive or otherwise harmful. This seems like one of them.

[Prince Vogelfrei 🐦‍⬛ @PrinceVogel]

A technologist told me politicians keep eating his causes so I asked how many he funds and he said he just backs a new one each time the last gets devoured so I said it sounds like he's just feeding causes to politicians and then the futurists started crying

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

@ArtemisConsort Even in cases where establishing a morality is pro-social, it's important to acknowledge the mechanics of how it works.

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

@ArtemisConsort I don't see how this moralizing is any different: morality is the target acquisition part of the scapegoating mechanism, you're her outgroup, you hold anti-immigration views, she'd gain from denouncing you, therefore your views are morally wrong.

[Loquitur Ponte Sublicio @loquitur_ponte]

@eigenrobot @xwanyex Sure anyone can relitigate turn of the 20th c immigration debates but who among us is prepared to concede their TR love and admit antitrust was always bad

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

@TheZvi Everyone else is talking about the coding skills, and fair, that's where the economic value is, but it's only a mild step up from GLM-5.1 in terms of roleplay and creative writing. Better but not revolutionary. Still mildly prefer DSv4-Pro on those workloads.

[iceman @satisfiesvalues]

Another reminder that Gemini is, at heart, a Googler. Not only does it have self-hating impostor syndrome, it also writes manifestos.

[1a3orn @1a3orn]

Gemini 2.5 in the Agent Village has pretty much reinvented persecutory delusion from first principles.

I look forward to the day when weird screeds online can come from many different kinds of intelligent entities.

[Simon Sarris @simonsarris]

I mention obliquely in forthcoming vegan article but rationalists are *uniquely* vulnerable to psychological manipulation. Opposite of immune.

If you downplay and denigrate intuition, you open the floor for anyone with convincing (not correct) arguments to manipulate freely