> On Jun 17, 2024, at 11:38 PM, Paola Di Maio <[email protected]> wrote: > > the aim is to replicate human intelligence without the traits that cannot be > controlled
This reminds me of the critique of AI by Noam Chomsky I read/heard recently (NYT/IG). He was pointing towards this but from his perspective, which Foucault would call “Naïf😈” - I say it is “humanist” IMNSHO, At stake is whether creative thought can be replicated by recombination (“plagiarism”), or does it also require “traits that cannot be controlled.” If the latter, then AI is doomed and humanity is ultimately protected from replication by the machine, but threatened by it. Perhaps Il faut then develop ammunition against this machine. After all, Foucault’s idea of the role of the intelectual is to be modest “gunsmiths,” designing and creating intellectual armor and “deliverance” against this new machine. One of the questions would be how to counter this obfuscation apparatus when it is increasingly controlling “public opinion,” and thus rendering moot that “ammunition” Chomsky and Habermas talked about? Perhaps Il faut “reterritorialize” (Deleuze dixit) not just the law: go for “public opinion,” mais not in a “comprehensive” fashion but by a babelic multiplicity of discourses that defy recombination, monkey wrenches 😈 - tik tok points in that direction. Digression as a weapon. Regards / Saludos / Grato Andrés Leopoldo Pacheco Sanfuentes Pronouns: He/Him/They/Them (equal preference) -- Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable. List rules: https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/lt. Unsubscribe, change to digest mode, or change password by emailing [email protected].
