There are others much more aligned with freedom and human improvement, like the Free Software Foundation: FSF was selected to participate in the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Consortium on Artificial Intelligence Safety. The work will provide recommendations to the government following President Biden's executive order on "the safe, secure, and trustworthy development and use of artificial intelligence." Our campaigns team is making sure that the free software perspective is represented in discussions about the ethical use of (so-called) AI. I love the “so-called” AI!😈
Otherwise it’ll happen like with the coining of “organic food,” when ALL FOOD started out as ORGANIC before it was “blinded by science (at the service of profit)” Regards / Saludos / Grato Andrés Leopoldo Pacheco Sanfuentes Pronouns: He/Him/They/Them (equal preference) > On Jun 18, 2024, at 4:08 AM, Andrés Leopoldo Pacheco Sanfuentes > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> 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].
