RE: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Chris Zell]

Your opinions are arrogant and arbitrary.   For a site such as this, that’s 
unfortunate.

Since the long term effects of technology are often impossible to predict, all 
sorts of things can emerge that damage the Elite’s rule.  Phone companies 
deeply regretted not pacing solid bandwidth charges on early internet use.

Many of the world leaders are affected by dementia, alcoholism and drug use – 
or simple self-serving laziness.  Example: a drunken Juncker and revelations 
about dementia medications used in Washington DC within Congress ( past month).

From: Che [mailto:comandantegri...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 7:39 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.



On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 1:10 PM, Chris Zell 
<chrisz...@wetmtv.com<mailto:chrisz...@wetmtv.com>> wrote:
My background is libertarian but I now feel some form of communism could be in 
our future, by default.

First, consider that deflationary factors could drive economies into permanent 
stimulus with scant regard for debts.  Even Bloomberg admits that the Bank of 
Japan may own a big chunk of their stock market already.  If they are forced 
into buying up stocks and bonds without end in order to avoid collapse, then we 
have a form of communism – if you consider things such as the Fed to be part of 
the government.

Second,  suppose automation does give us mass production of quality goods at 
very low prices?  If scarcity has always been the obstacle in socialist 
systems, then this might overcome it.  Leaders in China may believe this to be 
true – and time will tell if they are correct.


Look: you're not QUALIFIED to define the term 'communism'. Simple as that.

Stop trying. You just look bad (at best).



However -- we DO know that NO new technology or research is going to be funded 
by a bankrupt World Capitalist order: unless of course, it appears to have 
'Military significance'...


So no wonder so many of you here are so hostile to the anti-Militarists amongst 
us: you are *eager* to get the *sure* funding which now accompanies the buildup 
to what looks like an increasingly likely WWIII.






From: Daniel Rocha [mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com<mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com>]
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 5:57 AM
To: John Milstone <vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

I guess you are being ultra left here. The guy is showing will to learn and you 
are kind of snubbing him.

2017-10-13 3:29 GMT-03:00 Che 
<comandantegri...@gmail.com<mailto:comandantegri...@gmail.com>>:


This is just (yawn) one more fake 'post-marxist' analysis (of which there has 
been plenty: 'Post Modernism' being the exemplar of this genre). Dismissing the 
importance of those CENTRAL materialist concepts -- the Means and Mode of 
Production -- is a dead giveaway that this is just one more 
quasi-/pseudo-'scientific' analysis. With a suspect political-economic -- no 
doubt petit-bourgeois liberal -- agenda behind it, of course.






--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com<mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com>

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Daniel Rocha]

These think tanks more or less exposes the same type of thing. But, let me
show some good sources from "my side", these people more or less exposes
the same type of thing

https://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/
https://critiqueofcrisistheory.wordpress.com/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCCvdjsJtifsZoShjcAAHZpA/playlists
https://www.youtube.com/user/MaoistRebelNews2/playlists?shelf_id=0=1=dd


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Adrian Ashfield]

 Daniel,


ps.  I came across this piece after my last post that covers soe of the points 
I made.
http://mailchi.mp/epi/news-from-the-economic-policy-institute-74f85odszg?e=803fbad814

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Daniel Rocha]

Adrian, I don't know what you consider to be wealth. I don't get why you
talk about taxes. I don't get why you talk about businesses. Taxes has
nothing to do with socialism, it is something that belongs to capitalism,
or save for cooperatives at best. You are citing England You are talking
about private property. This is something abolished (with very small
exceptions). I am talking about USSR, specially under Stalin, North Korea,
Maoist China, Cuba Yugoslavia, socialists Albania, the countries of the
Warsaw pact.

2017-10-15 13:36 GMT-02:00 Adrian Ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net>:

> Daniel,
>
> Capitalism has a far better record for increasing a country's wealth than
> Socialism.  The problem with Socialism is that it reduces incentives to
> work. I lived in England when the top tax rate was 93% and on top of that
> there was a purchase tax of 33.3%.  What is the point of working harder and
> longer when you get to keep so little?  The government also nationalized
> major industries that prompt;y went downhill.  Many of us then emigrated.
> It was known as the brain drain.
>
> When I was young most businesses treated their employees better and there
> was a sense of loyalty in both directions.  Increased profits were shared
> to some extent.  T hat has all changed since the 1970s.
> Richard Thaler,who has just won the Nobel prize in economics, has
> corrected some of the flaws in economic theory, but the damage has already
> been done. My point was that it will be a different game with 30 - 50%
> unemployed.  In general it would be better for the individual to decide how
> to spend his money rather than have some socialist bureaucrat do it.  Hence
> UBI.
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com>
> To: John Milstone <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> Sent: Sat, Oct 14, 2017 11:35 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.
>
> Adrian,
>
> It's a matter of perspective of to works for who and to whom. In my
> perspective, capitalism has been tried and never worked. Socialism (I
> reserve communism for something else, utopic) always worked better on
> average for most individuals, within my parameters. I didn't see it not
> working but rather being defeated by external force, in most places though(
> there is still North Korea and Cuba). The sheer lack of planning, leaving
> stuff for random market forces, will necessarily lead to ultimate
> destruction of capitalism, what comes next is anybody guess.
>
> Note, I didn't address the state of affairs as power, but of
> responsibility that a given system gives to individuals. I don't see greed
> as a thing or an issue at all. I don't see it greed arising from evolution,
> so I don't see it as human nature, it is lack of planning, lack of
> accountability, on ideological level. This is why I see socialism as more
> akin to human nature, but capitalism must be really destroyed, even at
> ideological level, similar to the idea of serfdom or slavery. Then, the
> idea of socialism will have to be destroyed in order to achieve communism.
>
> Robots and AI will always be under the command of some people, so, I don't
> see any hope in there. Machines will not achieve a transition to complete
> control out of nowhere, similar to sky net. I don't see technology as
> something that arises from a given economic system. It is rather applied
> scientific method to solve problems and that's it. So, the British taking
> technology here or there is not something good or bad, rather, it is its
> use that matters.
>
> I don't hope to convince anyone, I am showing a way out, in case anyone
> reads this someday. I won't typein capslock like "Che" does, because,
> ultimately, as my father says, if you don't learn by means of love, you
> will learn by pain (and no, I am not saying in the hands of communists,
> quite the opposite).
>



-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Adrian Ashfield]

 Daniel,


Capitalism has a far better record for increasing a country's wealth than 
Socialism.  The problem with Socialism is that it reduces incentives to work. I 
lived in England when the top tax rate was 93% and on top of that there was a 
purchase tax of 33.3%.  What is the point of working harder and longer when you 
get to keep so little?  The government also nationalized major industries that 
prompt;y went downhill.  Many of us then emigrated.  It was known as the brain 
drain.


When I was young most businesses treated their employees better and there was a 
sense of loyalty in both directions.  Increased profits were shared to some 
extent.  T hat has all changed since the 1970s.
Richard Thaler,who has just won the Nobel prize in economics, has corrected 
some of the flaws in economic theory, but the damage has already been done. My 
point was that it will be a different game with 30 - 50% unemployed.  In 
general it would be better for the individual to decide how to spend his money 
rather than have some socialist bureaucrat do it.  Hence UBI.


 




-Original Message-
From: Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com>
To: John Milstone <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Sat, Oct 14, 2017 11:35 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.




Adrian,


It's a matter of perspective of to works for who and to whom. In my 
perspective, capitalism has been tried and never worked. Socialism (I reserve 
communism for something else, utopic) always worked better on average for most 
individuals, within my parameters. I didn't see it not working but rather being 
defeated by external force, in most places though( there is still North Korea 
and Cuba). The sheer lack of planning, leaving stuff for random market forces, 
will necessarily lead to ultimate destruction of capitalism, what comes next is 
anybody guess. 

Note, I didn't address the state of affairs as power, but of responsibility 
that a given system gives to individuals. I don't see greed as a thing or an 
issue at all. I don't see it greed arising from evolution, so I don't see it as 
human nature, it is lack of planning, lack of accountability, on ideological 
level. This is why I see socialism as more akin to human nature, but capitalism 
must be really destroyed, even at ideological level, similar to the idea of 
serfdom or slavery. Then, the idea of socialism will have to be destroyed in 
order to achieve communism.

 Robots and AI will always be under the command of some people, so, I don't see 
any hope in there. Machines will not achieve a transition to complete control 
out of nowhere, similar to sky net. I don't see technology as something that 
arises from a given economic system. It is rather applied scientific method to 
solve problems and that's it. So, the British taking technology here or there 
is not something good or bad, rather, it is its use that matters.


I don't hope to convince anyone, I am showing a way out, in case anyone reads 
this someday. I won't typein capslock like "Che" does, because, ultimately, as 
my father says, if you don't learn by means of love, you will learn by pain 
(and no, I am not saying in the hands of communists, quite the opposite).

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Daniel Rocha]

Adrian,

It's a matter of perspective of to works for who and to whom. In my
perspective, capitalism has been tried and never worked. Socialism (I
reserve communism for something else, utopic) always worked better on
average for most individuals, within my parameters. I didn't see it not
working but rather being defeated by external force, in most places though(
there is still North Korea and Cuba). The sheer lack of planning, leaving
stuff for random market forces, will necessarily lead to ultimate
destruction of capitalism, what comes next is anybody guess.

Note, I didn't address the state of affairs as power, but of responsibility
that a given system gives to individuals. I don't see greed as a thing or
an issue at all. I don't see it greed arising from evolution, so I don't
see it as human nature, it is lack of planning, lack of accountability, on
ideological level. This is why I see socialism as more akin to human
nature, but capitalism must be really destroyed, even at ideological level,
similar to the idea of serfdom or slavery. Then, the idea of socialism will
have to be destroyed in order to achieve communism.

Robots and AI will always be under the command of some people, so, I don't
see any hope in there. Machines will not achieve a transition to complete
control out of nowhere, similar to sky net. I don't see technology as
something that arises from a given economic system. It is rather applied
scientific method to solve problems and that's it. So, the British taking
technology here or there is not something good or bad, rather, it is its
use that matters.

I don't hope to convince anyone, I am showing a way out, in case anyone
reads this someday. I won't typein capslock like "Che" does, because,
ultimately, as my father says, if you don't learn by means of love, you
will learn by pain (and no, I am not saying in the hands of communists,
quite the opposite).

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Adrian Ashfield]

Daniel Rocha, while I sympathize with your distress on human failings, I don't 
agree with much of the picture you draw.  I have lived in three countries, 
visited much of the world for work and been around Africa half a dozen times.  
I know very well what extreme poverty looks like. You really need to read some 
detailed history of the world and the rise and fall of civilizations.  I 
recommend Durant's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lessons_of_History.

Power is always a mixture of good and bad. Despite being badly treated the 
British colonies are arguably better off with some of Western technology than 
if they had been left alone.  The real problem is bad leaders with excessive 
greed and wars.  The American people voted in the present useless government.  
Whose fault is that?

Communism doesn't work.  It has been tried.  Socialism is easy to get wrong and 
doesn't take sufficient account of human behavior.  A new political system will 
be required for the coming age of robotics and AI.  UBI is the best I have come 
across: do you know of a better idea?
Sure, I wrote bout America that is rich enough to implement it.  It will be a 
disaster for poor countries as the need for cheap labor dies. I don't know of a 
good solution for them with their governments so inept.. With luck both food 
and energy will become cheap enough that not many will starve.


 

-Original Message-
From: Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com>
To: John Milstone <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Sat, Oct 14, 2017 6:53 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.




Adrian, I am talking about the whole world. The rot began in in a few places, 
in antiquity, when class society began. That is, ony part of the population got 
the best slice of the pie. It's difficult for some of us  who live in the 1st 
world (I live in the 3rd) and never saw what it is abject poverty. Sure, in 
absolute terms, indeed things improved, because there is internet, antibiotics, 
for most. But improving is not enough, because that's not human nature to 
accept inequality, despite the existence of hierarchies. This was never the 
case in our evolution and those who are higher in power had actually to 
personally respond to their community the reason of why they are there.

  The higher the rate of inequality, the more you will have a tendency to have 
violent society or the number of people in jail. It doesn't matter if you 
prohibit drugs or not, if you control weapons or not, that's just all red 
herring. The one who are poor, for generation, will always be in revolt and 
attempting violent acts against the ones who are better off. If you deregulate 
or regulate something, that won't matter for them, they will just change the 
type of weapons or what is used to get stuff in "the easy way".  

 There is a tendency for people to be leaders, to collectively own some items 
(pieces of land become such items when society becomes sedentary). There is a 
tendency to fight for things which are important, to the point of death, 
specially where there is scarcity. But, there is no justification for greed. 
Some people are good managers or some have some type of talent, and eventually 
ends up making other people to work for them. The product of such work,that is 
money, ends up being owned by whoever commands the employees(it could be 
master/slave, lord/serf, large share owner/employee).   There is a systematic 
to think that this is normal. But it is not. This is herd behavior akin to the 
dismissal of cold fusion. It is a cultural domino effect. 


I will give you a perspective of how things are progressively worse, on 
relative terms, which leads to worse unsolvable contradictions. For the 170 
years, there has  rational justification for scarcity. When European colonial 
powers laid down the telegraph under the oceans, they were able plan and to 
enforce the extraction of raw materials in any part of the world. Before that, 
that could only be done within the Americas, which was much closer, inhabited 
by people with a much lower level of technology, in general. But this was the 
beginning of a major contradiction, that is, it was possible to actually plan 
the economy in a global level, an utopia could be actually built. Instead, the 
opposite happened, an arms race started, large business were integrated to 
governments because technological levels raised to a point when even mowing 
down opponents was profitable enough to be justifiable.

 This kept going until keeping colonies was too costly, after WWII, and the 
awareness of the exploitation characteristic of colonization became too 
apparent and fragile. But not without a rather small elite in each of this 
countries appear. Unlike the 1st world, these were rather small and in absolute 
terms, their middle class are in general at a poverty level of the 1st world. 
If AI becomes powerful enough, there will not be anywhere to relay menial jobs. 
To make matters

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Daniel Rocha]

Adrian, I am talking about the whole world. The rot began in in a few
places, in antiquity, when class society began. That is, ony part of the
population got the best slice of the pie. It's difficult for some of us
who live in the 1st world (I live in the 3rd) and never saw what it is
abject poverty. Sure, in absolute terms, indeed things improved, because
there is internet, antibiotics, for most. But improving is not enough,
because that's not human nature to accept inequality, despite the existence
of hierarchies. This was never the case in our evolution and those who are
higher in power had actually to personally respond to their community the
reason of why they are there.

The higher the rate of inequality, the more you will have a tendency to
have violent society or the number of people in jail. It doesn't matter if
you prohibit drugs or not, if you control weapons or not, that's just all
red herring. The one who are poor, for generation, will always be in revolt
and attempting violent acts against the ones who are better off. If you
deregulate or regulate something, that won't matter for them, they will
just change the type of weapons or what is used to get stuff in "the easy
way".

There is a tendency for people to be leaders, to collectively own some
items (pieces of land become such items when society becomes sedentary).
There is a tendency to fight for things which are important, to the point
of death, specially where there is scarcity. But, there is no justification
for greed. Some people are good managers or some have some type of talent,
and eventually ends up making other people to work for them. The product of
such work,that is money, ends up being owned by whoever commands the
employees(it could be master/slave, lord/serf, large share owner/employee).
  There is a systematic to think that this is normal. But it is not. This
is herd behavior akin to the dismissal of cold fusion. It is a cultural
domino effect.

I will give you a perspective of how things are progressively worse, on
relative terms, which leads to worse unsolvable contradictions. For the 170
years, there has  rational justification for scarcity. When European
colonial powers laid down the telegraph under the oceans, they were able
plan and to enforce the extraction of raw materials in any part of the
world. Before that, that could only be done within the Americas, which was
much closer, inhabited by people with a much lower level of technology, in
general. But this was the beginning of a major contradiction, that is, it
was possible to actually plan the economy in a global level, an utopia
could be actually built. Instead, the opposite happened, an arms race
started, large business were integrated to governments because
technological levels raised to a point when even mowing down opponents was
profitable enough to be justifiable.

This kept going until keeping colonies was too costly, after WWII, and the
awareness of the exploitation characteristic of colonization became too
apparent and fragile. But not without a rather small elite in each of this
countries appear. Unlike the 1st world, these were rather small and in
absolute terms, their middle class are in general at a poverty level of the
1st world. If AI becomes powerful enough, there will not be anywhere to
relay menial jobs. To make matters worse, it seems clear that the
sovereignty of any country can only be maintained with a large barrage of
nuclear weapons. I will give you an example, in 1960, USA could assemble a
nuke every few hours. Since 1991, neither Russia nor USA get rid ofno  more
than 5 or 10% of the total fissile material at the peak of cold war (fusion
material is comparatively easier to obtain, the difficulty is in design).
There is enough right now to assemble 80,000 war heads. Probably much more,
as warheads become more sophisticated and yield decrease. You can send many
more in a single missile, and do much more damage.

The way I see it, is that we are living in the eye of a hurricane, as
tensions grow more and more. Cold fusion is the only way I see to ease all
that, as it would allow the discontents with the civilization, as it is
now, to live well in relative isolation.

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Adrian Ashfield]

Interestingthread.  I disagree violence is inevitablefor the change but with 
the millionaire’s club called Congress running thingsit seems likely.
 
The rot startedwith Milton Freedman in 1976, stating that the purpose of 
business was tomaximize short term profit for the shareholders.  Business 
schools started teaching that andnow it is the normal practice.  Thisinevitably 
leads to growing income inequality that history shows always resultsin 
revolution if carried too far.
 
A better interimsolution is socialism as carried out by the Scandinavian 
countries.  These are now rated as better places to livethan America and they 
don’t have large slums and hundreds of thousands homelesspeople.   It would be 
far easier tochange the economic system that will be required by robotics and 
AI from thatstarting point.
 
Communism doesn’twork.  Greed is needed for motivation andeven if it started 
out with good leaders, Jerry Pounelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracyshows it will it 
fail.
What is requiredis something like Universal Basic Income (UBI) where the 
individual decides howto spend the money.  The limited trialsso far show that 
people actually become more productive.  If UBI is set at >$15.000 people won’t 
be soanxious about losing their jobs to AI and robotics. Switzerland proposed 
$30,000.

 
How to pay for itis the question.  It would replace allthe existing welfare 
schemes for starters. Healthcare costs could be halved by going to a single 
payer system asused by all the other advanced countries.  America has spent 
$14.2 trillion dollars on 13 wars I the last 30years.  The “defense” budget for 
2018 is$700 billion. Some could come from there. Taxation would pick up the 
rest.

 
Short of somedisaster, AI and technology will advance exponentially.  That 
people have money to spend is necessaryfor the economy to grow. Too many people 
here are in debt and can’t afford tobuy new stuff.  America could 
affordsomething like UBI but with our Congress a financial crash is more likely.

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Daniel Rocha]

Alain, when I tried to get into detail with Jed, the subject had already
changed, at least in my mind. But, implementing AI,  for me,is one capable
of understanding contexts, is different from any type of technology we know
it. It is not a mere aide to human skills, this time is really erasing the
human part from the equation. So, what I tried to argue, being optimistic
perhaps, it is that AI is not so devastating because it is simply not AI
proper. It is rather a misnomer for techniques that allow some simple
activities to be done by a automatically.

The strong AI which I am really scared of, is such that even innovation
centers you mention would be soon made useless, since AI would be able to
do that. These people would be really be left to poverty and there would be
no interest in bringing anything to them.

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Alain Sepeda]

people who says industrialisation lead to poverty, don't know how deeply
poor were farmers, most of the population, befre they decided to escape
starvation by working hard in factories, in awful but less awful situation.

Just my dad in the 50s at 20yo lost half of his friends because of
diseases, accidents, and war, in situation that can be avoided today.
.

this is what happened recently in china, making the rate of extreme poverty
move from majority to minority of humanity in few decades.

The Chinese wife of a friend proposed to her husband to sell one or two
kids and keep one, to be able to feed the family... she was happy it was
not needed and her husband was a fantastic man to state he could feed
everybody

We the rich, even if people say we are poor and exploited, cannot
understand what is reality of the past.
This is not a surprise that past culture were more fatalistic and
respectful of hierarchy than today, because there was no escape, whatever
you did.
If you wer not born in th right place, the only future was going to
america, where you have a better chance not to starve, or be locked in a
planned life like your dad.
We also idealize awful culture, defending theocratic slavery regime against
more modern totalitarianism.

AI is not replacing humans, more than donkey do. from the view of a
Nepaleses hired back, a donkey replace you if you are not owning the donkey.
AI, as Jed says, is back to the situation of the 1990s when I worked on it
(No surprise Yann LeCun is a leader, he was our reference in 1985 - he is
very modest today , criticizin both enthusiam and fears facing his dayli
reality with stupid AI). More TB andTFlops, but same wisdom as in the 80s,
if not less.
(my colleagues were using semantic networks and network pattern matching to
detect events in press news).
We don't nee to train the full population to make AI, as we don't need to
teach the population to develop compilers. we need to teach people to
exploit the AI, and all opportunities of modern technology, and if
something is to be shared it is the freedom to invest and innovate.
This last point make me sad as we are going reverse in the colapsing West.

If you are followinn what happen in emerging countries, you see that they
are quite good at exploiting technology. No surprise big corps like IBM
create "inverted innovation" centers in Africa, and follow what happen in
China or Indonesia.

See how Gojek mixed Uber idea with traditional Ojek (unstructured popular
mopped taxi)...



2017-10-14 4:30 GMT+02:00 Daniel Rocha :

> Jed, I did not say that something is narrow, only. I said that there is an
> accumulation of narrow techniques that accumulate. We, humans, along many
> animals, do have many of these mechanisms of patter recognition, such as
> overall syntax, face identification, sexual orientation, some sense of
> beauty regarding a few symmetric things, following objects with the eyes,
> finding boundaries in a landscape. Or, applying techniques to games and so
> on.To tell you the truth, I am not sure if we are just reproducing these
> automatic mechanism,by adding them bit by bit and if they will lead to a
> contextual understanding of things.  But, I am kind of skeptical.
>

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Daniel Rocha]

Jed, I did not say that something is narrow, only. I said that there is an
accumulation of narrow techniques that accumulate. We, humans, along many
animals, do have many of these mechanisms of patter recognition, such as
overall syntax, face identification, sexual orientation, some sense of
beauty regarding a few symmetric things, following objects with the eyes,
finding boundaries in a landscape. Or, applying techniques to games and so
on.To tell you the truth, I am not sure if we are just reproducing these
automatic mechanism,by adding them bit by bit and if they will lead to a
contextual understanding of things.  But, I am kind of skeptical.

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Jed Rothwell]

Daniel Rocha  wrote:

I am aware of these tidbits. But,Language is mechanical and have universal
> rules that are quite strict.If you feed it with massive quantities of data,
> it will eventually get it right . . .
>

I disagree. Google was not making much progress with that approach. The
ambiguity problem is unlikely to be solved with that approach alone. But
even if that is true, the multi-level neural network approach is not
narrow. It is being applied to wide range of problems with outstanding
success. Especially compared to previous AI. It beat the world champion in
go, which the experts thought would not happen for many years. It does a
better job of pattern recognition even with fewer sample patterns to start
with. As I mentioned with the cat example, it can abstract the essence of
shapes and synthesize a recognizable image that a human recognizes as a
cat. It can synthesize a graphic image that summarizes the distinguishing
charactoristics of the object. That is amazing, and far more complicated
than just distinguishing one object from another.

This article shows the abstract image of a cat generated by a Google
program. It is eerie:

https://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1266579

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/26/technology/in-a-big-network-of-computers-evidence-of-machine-learning.html

Some aspects of AI are probably still far distant, such as a sentient
computer. But there is no denying that rapid progress is being made, and
the main reason now is the multi-level neural network. The previous boost
was from massive databases. In real world applications the two approaches
are blended together, and other techniques are being used.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Che]

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:

> The point it is that, as far as I can notice here, there is no such
> notion. You are telling them stuff without explaining what you mean. You
> seem to be a lunatic or a fanatic for them.
>

What reformists and the pseudo-Left DO is PANDER to these sorts... who
remain essentially unchallenged in their 'comfort-zones'. And so you get
the usual ridiculous 'patriotic' bile out of them here, as everywhere else.
It is the FEAR of reformists and panderers that they are seen to be
'irrelevant' or 'wrong' or (gasp) 'not quite right in the head', that has
them feeding into this smug obtuseness.

However it is the POINT of Socialist class-struggle to NOT pander to either
agents OR followers of the hegemonic bourgeois order. In any way.

Hell; AFAIC, people like me will look like SAINTS compared to what the
likes of *you* counsel here, come the inevitable lurching financial
collapse (or World war) soon coming -- all the more-so, for those who will
now lose their jobs, cars, houses, families (and perhaps their minds as
well), as opposed to those who suffered a decade ago...





> You are talking about a game they don't know, you don't explain the rules
> at all, that is, how you reached such conclusions,  and you don't seem to
> notice that.
>

Not my fault -- NOT my problem. And so please stop second-guessing my
methods, OK? In spite of what you say above, you're in FACT, actually just
*encouraging* them to continue-on in their willful ignorance. You and I are
NOT on the same team, bub. So MYOB.






>
> 2017-10-13 20:27 GMT-03:00 Che :
>
>> No, that's just what people 'improving' marxism -- i.e. reformist
>> radicals (an oxymoron, no?) -- invariably call real marxists. You know:
>> those people who hold onto their quaint, old, obsolete, fervent beliefs in
>> things like historical-materialism, the Internationalist proletariat and
>> class-struggle...
>>
>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Daniel Rocha]

The point it is that, as far as I can notice here, there is no such notion.
You are telling them stuff without explaining what you mean. You seem to be
a lunatic or a fanatic for them. You are talking about a game they don't
know, you don't explain the rules at all, that is, how you reached such
conclusions,  and you don't seem to notice that.

2017-10-13 20:27 GMT-03:00 Che :

> No, that's just what people 'improving' marxism -- i.e. reformist radicals
> (an oxymoron, no?) -- invariably call real marxists. You know: those people
> who hold onto their quaint, old, obsolete, fervent beliefs in things like
> historical-materialism, the Internationalist proletariat and
> class-struggle...
>
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Che]

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 3:08 PM, Alain Sepeda 
wrote:

> it seems some histocical perspective is required to understand all is
> normal.
>
> Inflation is a recent phénomenon, and for example 19th century was veru
> deflationist.
>


What are you talking about. Inflation was an issue in even ancient times.
The spanish created a MAJOR financial crisis when the plundered the 'New
World' for silver and gold, in the 16th century. Capitalism is unstable,
*by its very nature*.


Read Marx ferkrissakes. Only smug, brainwashed fools don't.








> in fact it is not so important as purchase power get better because of
> cost reduction.
> This si what sharing economy, in fact the hidden capitalism of average and
> poor people, is doing reducing costs, making you richer with less money.
>
> http://www.libertylawsite.org/2017/09/29/how-the-sharing-
> economy-helps-the-middle-class-by-enlivening-capital/
>
> AI and robots are not more disruptive than horses were.
> I've heard of the luddite war in nepal agains donkeys, to keep employement
> of human donkey...
> rational becausein that traditional society there are obstacle to acquire
> capital for the lower caste.
>
> http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/
> capitalisms-assault-on-the-indian-caste-system
>
> not a surprise that communisme flourished in a locked society like Russia
> or China, in colonial zone like Indochina, in corrupted banana republic
> like Cuba, and not where it was created in Britain.
>
>
>
>
> 2017-10-13 20:15 GMT+02:00 Daniel Rocha :
>
>> Things are not so simple, as I see it. I don't see the actual China as
>> socialist or communist, nor I see them returning to a socialist path. This
>> will become clear later, though this is a very very rough explanation.
>> Things do not really get cheap because they are more abundantly produced
>> (now I am putting my point of view in this whole thing, which is not really
>> standard) because money (gold or precious metals) or value in circulation
>> (I am not counting credit/debt here) also decreases because labor employed
>> in industry (the source) decreases accordingly. So, there is less and less
>> money to expend, credit, instead, expands, and thus debt, because it just
>> cannot be payed. Sectors of economy become glut and bubbles are created.
>>
>> Pegging money to something of value is also not good. Eventually, it is
>> not enough to keep track of the quantity of things produced, so stagflation
>> happens. Just printing money is also not good, it leads to hyperinflation.
>> A socialist system, ideally, do not have such problems because money is
>> used as grants or as a mean of accounting. This is possible because there
>> is no accumulation of money in the hand of few. But, the world is not
>> ideal, simply because all countries need to trade and the world is nearly
>> all capitalist. So, what happens is that there is a need to accumulate
>> reserves, which generally leads to stagnation. Both USSR and USA suffered
>> from this problem starting in the 70s, but USA could alleviate the problem
>> with the Volker shock, that is, letting credit abound, multiplying
>> reserves. Not so much USSR, given its ideological compromise. Straying off
>> this path led to its doom. Many countries of East Europe acquired large
>> debts with IMF, which led them, in a way or another, to bankrupt. Look for
>> the total debt of countries (not just public only, money flows indent of
>> ownership)you will see that they all of them explode starting around 1980.
>> Soon, shit will hit the fan.
>>
>> China is different case though. It could save itself by crippling the
>> economic conditions on the countryside and making people start to cities,
>> where they could provide cheap work for industries. So, Chinese leadership
>> deliberately sabotaged the most basic epithets of socialism in order to
>> stay in power.  They have been trying to improve the conditions on the
>> countryside in the last few years, though, in order to avoid rebellions in
>> the city. Wages raised and so unemployment. The labor is not so cheap
>> anymore, it's getting close to Mexico, officially.
>>
>> There has been some attempt, though not conscious, in setting something
>> similar to precious metal. Crypt currencies somehow are equivalent to mine,
>> where value comes labor employed through maintenance of servers or that
>> employed in the electric system. But, the value it seems, I am not sure if
>> it is regulated by the market, unlike with precious metals. There is a
>> certain scarcity factor that is introduce to make mining more difficult, I
>> cannot, right now see this as really equivalent to a real mine running out.
>> In any case, fluctuations make it not suitable for the people in general to
>> trade. Like with precious metal, there should be some kind of "bank notes",
>> or some similar thing to avoid fluctuations.
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Che]

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 1:10 PM, Chris Zell <chrisz...@wetmtv.com> wrote:

> My background is libertarian but I now feel some form of communism could
> be in our future, by default.
>
>
>
> First, consider that deflationary factors could drive economies into
> permanent stimulus with scant regard for debts.  Even Bloomberg admits that
> the Bank of Japan may own a big chunk of their stock market already.  If
> they are forced into buying up stocks and bonds without end in order to
> avoid collapse, then we have a form of communism – if you consider things
> such as the Fed to be part of the government.
>
>
>
> Second,  suppose automation does give us mass production of quality goods
> at very low prices?  If scarcity has always been the obstacle in socialist
> systems, then this might overcome it.  Leaders in China may believe this to
> be true – and time will tell if they are correct.
>


Look: you're not QUALIFIED to define the term 'communism'. Simple as that.

Stop trying. You just look bad (at best).



However -- we DO know that NO new technology or research is going to be
funded by a bankrupt World Capitalist order: unless of course, it appears
to have 'Military significance'...


So no wonder so many of you here are so hostile to the anti-Militarists
amongst us: you are *eager* to get the *sure* funding which now accompanies
the buildup to what looks like an increasingly likely WWIII.






>
>
> *From:* Daniel Rocha [mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, October 13, 2017 5:57 AM
> *To:* John Milstone <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.
>
>
>
> I guess you are being ultra left here. The guy is showing will to learn
> and you are kind of snubbing him.
>
>
>
> 2017-10-13 3:29 GMT-03:00 Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com>:
>
>
>
>
>
> This is just (yawn) one more fake 'post-marxist' analysis (of which there
> has been plenty: 'Post Modernism' being the exemplar of this genre).
> Dismissing the importance of those CENTRAL materialist concepts -- the
> Means and Mode of Production -- is a dead giveaway that this is just one
> more quasi-/pseudo-'scientific' analysis. With a suspect political-economic
> -- no doubt petit-bourgeois liberal -- agenda behind it, of course.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Che]

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 12:03 PM, H LV  wrote:

> If you want to change society you have to work with people as they are,
> not as you wish they were.
>
>
> Harry
>


Says a man who's clearly never been in any leadership position of any kind;
let alone who understands the way the Universe *actually* works, on a
Human, social, societal level...



Yours is the eternal excuse of reformists and opportunists and defeatists.

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Che]

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:25 AM, H LV  wrote:

> Pure Marxism is a materialist religion and not a science.
>
> harry
>


It never ceases to amaze me how (otherwise fairly intelligent) people can
maintain these long-term internal states of cognitive dissonance. The
wunnerful effects of ceaseless propaganda and indoctrination on the young,
plastic mind no..?


In any case: there is NO maniacal, dangerous cultish religion bigger than
the fervent -- vulgar -- belief in some hallowe'ed, all-seeing,
all-knowing, omnipotent, omniscient 'Free Market'.
LOL

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Che]

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:

> I guess you are being ultra left here. The guy is showing will to learn
> and you are kind of snubbing him.
>

No, that's just what people 'improving' marxism -- i.e. reformist radicals
(an oxymoron, no?) -- invariably call real marxists. You know: those people
who hold onto their quaint, old, obsolete, fervent beliefs in things like
historical-materialism, the Internationalist proletariat and
class-struggle...

 'Sectarian' is another common knee-jerk response.


In any case: Cold Fusion has a SOCIALIST future. NOT a Capitalist one.

No one does.






>
> 2017-10-13 3:29 GMT-03:00 Che :
>
>>
>>
>> This is just (yawn) one more fake 'post-marxist' analysis (of which there
>> has been plenty: 'Post Modernism' being the exemplar of this genre).
>> Dismissing the importance of those CENTRAL materialist concepts -- the
>> Means and Mode of Production -- is a dead giveaway that this is just one
>> more quasi-/pseudo-'scientific' analysis. With a suspect political-economic
>> -- no doubt petit-bourgeois liberal -- agenda behind it, of course.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Daniel Rocha]

I am aware of these tidbits. But,Language is mechanical and have universal
rules that are quite strict.If you feed it with massive quantities of data,
it will eventually get it right:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Example-based_machine_translation .
It can be seen here an example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generative_grammar . And, as I mentioned, as
times go, examples of very narrow problems accumulate, which gives an
impression of advance. But, all that is achieved because, even if something
is superficially very subjective, it has rules. There is no understanding
of a text or a context, even if the translation is correct. That's because
grammar rules are strict. That is the same with poker and go.

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Jed Rothwell]

Daniel Rocha  wrote:


> There isn't,though, any meaningful advance in AI for decades. What happens
> is the massive feed of data for very repetitive tasks in a very narrow
> field of expertise.
>

Your information is out of date. It is true there was little progress for
many decades, and for a while in the 1990s and early 2000s, progress was
mainly from massive databases. That is how Google made progress in machine
translation, for example. However, in the last 5 or 10 years, there have
been breakthroughs in neural network technology. It has been improved with
multi-level networks, where one network produces output for another, which
passes output to another, and so on. This has resulted in things like AI
programs that recognize a photo of a cat taken from just about any angle,
and programs that can even synthesize a generalized image of a cat. These
programs work much better than previous ones. Previous ones would look at
something like a meaningless pattern of stripes or dots and indicate that
was a picture of a giraffe (or some other off the wall choice).

Neural networks go way back in AI research, but in previous implementations
they were only one layer deep. For a long time, the neural network approach
was more or less abandoned. Until someone thought of the multi-level
improvement.

The results of the new approach are dramatic. They include things like the
program that beat the world's best Go player, and a dramatic improvement in
the quality of Google translate. Do a search for:

google translate improved with neural networks

. . . and you will find many articles about this. Such as: "The Great AI
Awakening:"

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/14/magazine/the-great-ai-awakening.html

The article quotes a translation of this sentence in Spanish by Borges:

Uno no es lo que es por lo que escribe, sino por lo que ha leído.

The old Google translate system rendered this:

One is not what is for what he writes, but for what he has read.


The new one:

You are not what you write, but what you have read.


That's astounding.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Daniel Rocha]

Neither AI nor robots are a problem at all, the trouble is the transition.
As the transition happens, people are not happily lose their jobs neither
owners of large business will be able to sustain profits, this is
unsolvable contradiction (that is, not solvable without violence). Unlike
other types of innovation, AI is not an amplification of human labor, it is
a substitution to humans. Perhaps, if cold fusion were to be realized
before such threshold was crossed, people would perhaps get away from
civilization and mind their own business, but it doesn't seem the case
until now. There isn't,though, any meaningful advance in AI for decades.
What happens is the massive feed of data for very repetitive tasks in a
very narrow field of expertise.It just happens that, as time goes, the
number of narrow field increases. A true AI wouldn't require that much data
to learn new fields.

Indeed, all revolutions were associated with poverty. But not exactly any
type of poverty. It's a type of poverty that cannot be brushed away. In the
case of UK, or most developed countries, at least part of menial jobs could
be offloaded to colonies or to the third world, so you wouldn't have too
much people angry close together. This is not enough though, because you
have to have a strong army with high morale and with massive support of the
population (partisans, like Vietcongs). This high morale, for example, came
in general in the form of genocide from a foreign invader. This is the case
of Russia in the 1st world war, which suffered genocide from the rulings of
nobles (they spoke French among themselves, for example); China, South East
Asia, from Japan and European powers; East Europe, were devastated by
Nazis, had, because of that, a vast quantity of partisans, and they were
the ones that ruled. Fractured countries, without a clear ethnic majority
failed, like in Africa, Middle East and in most of the Andean countries. In
South Asia, there is a long stale mate because, while they are fractured,
each of one them is quite large.

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Alain Sepeda]

it seems some histocical perspective is required to understand all is
normal.

Inflation is a recent phénomenon, and for example 19th century was veru
deflationist.
in fact it is not so important as purchase power get better because of cost
reduction.
This si what sharing economy, in fact the hidden capitalism of average and
poor people, is doing reducing costs, making you richer with less money.

http://www.libertylawsite.org/2017/09/29/how-the-sharing-economy-helps-the-middle-class-by-enlivening-capital/

AI and robots are not more disruptive than horses were.
I've heard of the luddite war in nepal agains donkeys, to keep employement
of human donkey...
rational becausein that traditional society there are obstacle to acquire
capital for the lower caste.

http://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/capitalisms-assault-on-the-indian-caste-system

not a surprise that communisme flourished in a locked society like Russia
or China, in colonial zone like Indochina, in corrupted banana republic
like Cuba, and not where it was created in Britain.




2017-10-13 20:15 GMT+02:00 Daniel Rocha :

> Things are not so simple, as I see it. I don't see the actual China as
> socialist or communist, nor I see them returning to a socialist path. This
> will become clear later, though this is a very very rough explanation.
> Things do not really get cheap because they are more abundantly produced
> (now I am putting my point of view in this whole thing, which is not really
> standard) because money (gold or precious metals) or value in circulation
> (I am not counting credit/debt here) also decreases because labor employed
> in industry (the source) decreases accordingly. So, there is less and less
> money to expend, credit, instead, expands, and thus debt, because it just
> cannot be payed. Sectors of economy become glut and bubbles are created.
>
> Pegging money to something of value is also not good. Eventually, it is
> not enough to keep track of the quantity of things produced, so stagflation
> happens. Just printing money is also not good, it leads to hyperinflation.
> A socialist system, ideally, do not have such problems because money is
> used as grants or as a mean of accounting. This is possible because there
> is no accumulation of money in the hand of few. But, the world is not
> ideal, simply because all countries need to trade and the world is nearly
> all capitalist. So, what happens is that there is a need to accumulate
> reserves, which generally leads to stagnation. Both USSR and USA suffered
> from this problem starting in the 70s, but USA could alleviate the problem
> with the Volker shock, that is, letting credit abound, multiplying
> reserves. Not so much USSR, given its ideological compromise. Straying off
> this path led to its doom. Many countries of East Europe acquired large
> debts with IMF, which led them, in a way or another, to bankrupt. Look for
> the total debt of countries (not just public only, money flows indent of
> ownership)you will see that they all of them explode starting around 1980.
> Soon, shit will hit the fan.
>
> China is different case though. It could save itself by crippling the
> economic conditions on the countryside and making people start to cities,
> where they could provide cheap work for industries. So, Chinese leadership
> deliberately sabotaged the most basic epithets of socialism in order to
> stay in power.  They have been trying to improve the conditions on the
> countryside in the last few years, though, in order to avoid rebellions in
> the city. Wages raised and so unemployment. The labor is not so cheap
> anymore, it's getting close to Mexico, officially.
>
> There has been some attempt, though not conscious, in setting something
> similar to precious metal. Crypt currencies somehow are equivalent to mine,
> where value comes labor employed through maintenance of servers or that
> employed in the electric system. But, the value it seems, I am not sure if
> it is regulated by the market, unlike with precious metals. There is a
> certain scarcity factor that is introduce to make mining more difficult, I
> cannot, right now see this as really equivalent to a real mine running out.
> In any case, fluctuations make it not suitable for the people in general to
> trade. Like with precious metal, there should be some kind of "bank notes",
> or some similar thing to avoid fluctuations.
>

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Daniel Rocha]

Things are not so simple, as I see it. I don't see the actual China as
socialist or communist, nor I see them returning to a socialist path. This
will become clear later, though this is a very very rough explanation.
Things do not really get cheap because they are more abundantly produced
(now I am putting my point of view in this whole thing, which is not really
standard) because money (gold or precious metals) or value in circulation
(I am not counting credit/debt here) also decreases because labor employed
in industry (the source) decreases accordingly. So, there is less and less
money to expend, credit, instead, expands, and thus debt, because it just
cannot be payed. Sectors of economy become glut and bubbles are created.

Pegging money to something of value is also not good. Eventually, it is not
enough to keep track of the quantity of things produced, so stagflation
happens. Just printing money is also not good, it leads to hyperinflation.
A socialist system, ideally, do not have such problems because money is
used as grants or as a mean of accounting. This is possible because there
is no accumulation of money in the hand of few. But, the world is not
ideal, simply because all countries need to trade and the world is nearly
all capitalist. So, what happens is that there is a need to accumulate
reserves, which generally leads to stagnation. Both USSR and USA suffered
from this problem starting in the 70s, but USA could alleviate the problem
with the Volker shock, that is, letting credit abound, multiplying
reserves. Not so much USSR, given its ideological compromise. Straying off
this path led to its doom. Many countries of East Europe acquired large
debts with IMF, which led them, in a way or another, to bankrupt. Look for
the total debt of countries (not just public only, money flows indent of
ownership)you will see that they all of them explode starting around 1980.
Soon, shit will hit the fan.

China is different case though. It could save itself by crippling the
economic conditions on the countryside and making people start to cities,
where they could provide cheap work for industries. So, Chinese leadership
deliberately sabotaged the most basic epithets of socialism in order to
stay in power.  They have been trying to improve the conditions on the
countryside in the last few years, though, in order to avoid rebellions in
the city. Wages raised and so unemployment. The labor is not so cheap
anymore, it's getting close to Mexico, officially.

There has been some attempt, though not conscious, in setting something
similar to precious metal. Crypt currencies somehow are equivalent to mine,
where value comes labor employed through maintenance of servers or that
employed in the electric system. But, the value it seems, I am not sure if
it is regulated by the market, unlike with precious metals. There is a
certain scarcity factor that is introduce to make mining more difficult, I
cannot, right now see this as really equivalent to a real mine running out.
In any case, fluctuations make it not suitable for the people in general to
trade. Like with precious metal, there should be some kind of "bank notes",
or some similar thing to avoid fluctuations.

RE: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Chris Zell]

My background is libertarian but I now feel some form of communism could be in 
our future, by default.

First, consider that deflationary factors could drive economies into permanent 
stimulus with scant regard for debts.  Even Bloomberg admits that the Bank of 
Japan may own a big chunk of their stock market already.  If they are forced 
into buying up stocks and bonds without end in order to avoid collapse, then we 
have a form of communism – if you consider things such as the Fed to be part of 
the government.

Second,  suppose automation does give us mass production of quality goods at 
very low prices?  If scarcity has always been the obstacle in socialist 
systems, then this might overcome it.  Leaders in China may believe this to be 
true – and time will tell if they are correct.

From: Daniel Rocha [mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 5:57 AM
To: John Milstone <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

I guess you are being ultra left here. The guy is showing will to learn and you 
are kind of snubbing him.

2017-10-13 3:29 GMT-03:00 Che 
<comandantegri...@gmail.com<mailto:comandantegri...@gmail.com>>:


This is just (yawn) one more fake 'post-marxist' analysis (of which there has 
been plenty: 'Post Modernism' being the exemplar of this genre). Dismissing the 
importance of those CENTRAL materialist concepts -- the Means and Mode of 
Production -- is a dead giveaway that this is just one more 
quasi-/pseudo-'scientific' analysis. With a suspect political-economic -- no 
doubt petit-bourgeois liberal -- agenda behind it, of course.






--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com<mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com>

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[H LV]

If you want to change society you have to work with people as they are, not
as you wish they were.


Harry

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 11:25 AM, H LV  wrote:

> Pure Marxism is a materialist religion and not a science.
>
> harry
>
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 10:01 AM, H LV  wrote:
>
>> Yawn.
>>
>> Harry
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:29 AM, Che  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 1:35 PM, H LV  wrote:
>>>
 ​The Precariat and Class Struggle By Guy Standing

 Abstract: The world economy is in the midst of a Global Transformation
 that is producing a new global class structure. A new mass class is
 emerging – the precariat – characterised by chronic uncertainty and
 insecurity. Although the precariat is still a class-in-the-making, divided
 within itself, its elements are united in rejecting old mainstream
 political traditions. To become a transformative class, however, the
 precariat needs to move beyond the primitive rebel stage manifested in 2011
 and become enough of a class-for-itself to be a power for change. This will
 involve a struggle for redistribution of the key assets needed for a good
 life in a good society in the twenty-first century –not the “means of
 production”, but socioeconomic security, control of time, quality space,
 knowledge (or education), financial knowledge and financial capital.​

 http://www.guystanding.com/files/documents/Precariat_and_Cla
 ss_Struggle_final_English.pdf

>>>
>>>
>>> This is just (yawn) one more fake 'post-marxist' analysis (of which
>>> there has been plenty: 'Post Modernism' being the exemplar of this genre).
>>> Dismissing the importance of those CENTRAL materialist concepts -- the
>>> Means and Mode of Production -- is a dead giveaway that this is just one
>>> more quasi-/pseudo-'scientific' analysis. With a suspect political-economic
>>> -- no doubt petit-bourgeois liberal -- agenda behind it, of course.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>



 On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:49 PM, Che 
 wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:06 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> https://thenextweb.com/contributors/2017/05/19/artificial-in
>> telligence-will-impact-professional-writing/
>>
>> How Artificial Intelligence will impact professional writing
>>
>
>
> As I keep pointing out: such technological developments could only
> constitute a 'crisis' in a society where every Human being is NOT
> guaranteed a lifetime quality-of-life. And Capitalism -- being a system of
> institutionalized *artificial* scarcity, benefiting ONLY a tiny,
> self-interested elite -- IS that infernal society.
>
> Therefore we NEED and REQUIRE *Socialism* in order to advance as a
> species.
>
> But as things stand -- the U.S. Imperialists are working overtime to
> snuff us all, at the moment...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Axil Axil 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> http://nypost.com/2017/08/29/artificial-intelligence-is-writ
>>> ing-the-next-game-of-thrones-book/
>>>
>>> Artificial intelligence is writing the next ‘Game of Thrones’ book
>>>
>>
>>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[H LV]

Pure Marxism is a materialist religion and not a science.

harry

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 10:01 AM, H LV  wrote:

> Yawn.
>
> Harry
>
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:29 AM, Che  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 1:35 PM, H LV  wrote:
>>
>>> ​The Precariat and Class Struggle By Guy Standing
>>>
>>> Abstract: The world economy is in the midst of a Global Transformation
>>> that is producing a new global class structure. A new mass class is
>>> emerging – the precariat – characterised by chronic uncertainty and
>>> insecurity. Although the precariat is still a class-in-the-making, divided
>>> within itself, its elements are united in rejecting old mainstream
>>> political traditions. To become a transformative class, however, the
>>> precariat needs to move beyond the primitive rebel stage manifested in 2011
>>> and become enough of a class-for-itself to be a power for change. This will
>>> involve a struggle for redistribution of the key assets needed for a good
>>> life in a good society in the twenty-first century –not the “means of
>>> production”, but socioeconomic security, control of time, quality space,
>>> knowledge (or education), financial knowledge and financial capital.​
>>>
>>> http://www.guystanding.com/files/documents/Precariat_and_Cla
>>> ss_Struggle_final_English.pdf
>>>
>>
>>
>> This is just (yawn) one more fake 'post-marxist' analysis (of which there
>> has been plenty: 'Post Modernism' being the exemplar of this genre).
>> Dismissing the importance of those CENTRAL materialist concepts -- the
>> Means and Mode of Production -- is a dead giveaway that this is just one
>> more quasi-/pseudo-'scientific' analysis. With a suspect political-economic
>> -- no doubt petit-bourgeois liberal -- agenda behind it, of course.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:49 PM, Che 
>>> wrote:
>>>


 On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:06 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> https://thenextweb.com/contributors/2017/05/19/artificial-in
> telligence-will-impact-professional-writing/
>
> How Artificial Intelligence will impact professional writing
>


 As I keep pointing out: such technological developments could only
 constitute a 'crisis' in a society where every Human being is NOT
 guaranteed a lifetime quality-of-life. And Capitalism -- being a system of
 institutionalized *artificial* scarcity, benefiting ONLY a tiny,
 self-interested elite -- IS that infernal society.

 Therefore we NEED and REQUIRE *Socialism* in order to advance as a
 species.

 But as things stand -- the U.S. Imperialists are working overtime to
 snuff us all, at the moment...








>
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> http://nypost.com/2017/08/29/artificial-intelligence-is-writ
>> ing-the-next-game-of-thrones-book/
>>
>> Artificial intelligence is writing the next ‘Game of Thrones’ book
>>
>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[H LV]

Yawn.

Harry

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:29 AM, Che  wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 1:35 PM, H LV  wrote:
>
>> ​The Precariat and Class Struggle By Guy Standing
>>
>> Abstract: The world economy is in the midst of a Global Transformation
>> that is producing a new global class structure. A new mass class is
>> emerging – the precariat – characterised by chronic uncertainty and
>> insecurity. Although the precariat is still a class-in-the-making, divided
>> within itself, its elements are united in rejecting old mainstream
>> political traditions. To become a transformative class, however, the
>> precariat needs to move beyond the primitive rebel stage manifested in 2011
>> and become enough of a class-for-itself to be a power for change. This will
>> involve a struggle for redistribution of the key assets needed for a good
>> life in a good society in the twenty-first century –not the “means of
>> production”, but socioeconomic security, control of time, quality space,
>> knowledge (or education), financial knowledge and financial capital.​
>>
>> http://www.guystanding.com/files/documents/Precariat_and_Cla
>> ss_Struggle_final_English.pdf
>>
>
>
> This is just (yawn) one more fake 'post-marxist' analysis (of which there
> has been plenty: 'Post Modernism' being the exemplar of this genre).
> Dismissing the importance of those CENTRAL materialist concepts -- the
> Means and Mode of Production -- is a dead giveaway that this is just one
> more quasi-/pseudo-'scientific' analysis. With a suspect political-economic
> -- no doubt petit-bourgeois liberal -- agenda behind it, of course.
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:49 PM, Che  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:06 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>>
 https://thenextweb.com/contributors/2017/05/19/artificial-in
 telligence-will-impact-professional-writing/

 How Artificial Intelligence will impact professional writing

>>>
>>>
>>> As I keep pointing out: such technological developments could only
>>> constitute a 'crisis' in a society where every Human being is NOT
>>> guaranteed a lifetime quality-of-life. And Capitalism -- being a system of
>>> institutionalized *artificial* scarcity, benefiting ONLY a tiny,
>>> self-interested elite -- IS that infernal society.
>>>
>>> Therefore we NEED and REQUIRE *Socialism* in order to advance as a
>>> species.
>>>
>>> But as things stand -- the U.S. Imperialists are working overtime to
>>> snuff us all, at the moment...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

 On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> http://nypost.com/2017/08/29/artificial-intelligence-is-writ
> ing-the-next-game-of-thrones-book/
>
> Artificial intelligence is writing the next ‘Game of Thrones’ book
>


>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Daniel Rocha]

I guess you are being ultra left here. The guy is showing will to learn and
you are kind of snubbing him.

2017-10-13 3:29 GMT-03:00 Che :

>
>
> This is just (yawn) one more fake 'post-marxist' analysis (of which there
> has been plenty: 'Post Modernism' being the exemplar of this genre).
> Dismissing the importance of those CENTRAL materialist concepts -- the
> Means and Mode of Production -- is a dead giveaway that this is just one
> more quasi-/pseudo-'scientific' analysis. With a suspect political-economic
> -- no doubt petit-bourgeois liberal -- agenda behind it, of course.
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Che]

On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 1:35 PM, H LV  wrote:

> ​The Precariat and Class Struggle By Guy Standing
>
> Abstract: The world economy is in the midst of a Global Transformation
> that is producing a new global class structure. A new mass class is
> emerging – the precariat – characterised by chronic uncertainty and
> insecurity. Although the precariat is still a class-in-the-making, divided
> within itself, its elements are united in rejecting old mainstream
> political traditions. To become a transformative class, however, the
> precariat needs to move beyond the primitive rebel stage manifested in 2011
> and become enough of a class-for-itself to be a power for change. This will
> involve a struggle for redistribution of the key assets needed for a good
> life in a good society in the twenty-first century –not the “means of
> production”, but socioeconomic security, control of time, quality space,
> knowledge (or education), financial knowledge and financial capital.​
>
> http://www.guystanding.com/files/documents/Precariat_and_
> Class_Struggle_final_English.pdf
>


This is just (yawn) one more fake 'post-marxist' analysis (of which there
has been plenty: 'Post Modernism' being the exemplar of this genre).
Dismissing the importance of those CENTRAL materialist concepts -- the
Means and Mode of Production -- is a dead giveaway that this is just one
more quasi-/pseudo-'scientific' analysis. With a suspect political-economic
-- no doubt petit-bourgeois liberal -- agenda behind it, of course.





>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:49 PM, Che  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:06 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> https://thenextweb.com/contributors/2017/05/19/artificial-in
>>> telligence-will-impact-professional-writing/
>>>
>>> How Artificial Intelligence will impact professional writing
>>>
>>
>>
>> As I keep pointing out: such technological developments could only
>> constitute a 'crisis' in a society where every Human being is NOT
>> guaranteed a lifetime quality-of-life. And Capitalism -- being a system of
>> institutionalized *artificial* scarcity, benefiting ONLY a tiny,
>> self-interested elite -- IS that infernal society.
>>
>> Therefore we NEED and REQUIRE *Socialism* in order to advance as a
>> species.
>>
>> But as things stand -- the U.S. Imperialists are working overtime to
>> snuff us all, at the moment...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>>
 http://nypost.com/2017/08/29/artificial-intelligence-is-writ
 ing-the-next-game-of-thrones-book/

 Artificial intelligence is writing the next ‘Game of Thrones’ book

>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Daniel Rocha]

This is over optimism based on the moderate success of translation of non
creative writing.Most science and news reports, is very mechanical. We are
born with mechanism that universally holds for every language, in terms of
organizing adjectives, substantives, agreements. What the machine does is
to identify this elements in a language using statistics based on
collections, and parse the equivalent to another language, also based on
statistics.

Now writing, specially creative writting relies on context. Guessing what
will happen, as it is alleged in the text, won't make anything worth.

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[H LV]

​The Precariat and Class Struggle By Guy Standing

Abstract: The world economy is in the midst of a Global Transformation that
is producing a new global class structure. A new mass class is emerging –
the precariat – characterised by chronic uncertainty and insecurity.
Although the precariat is still a class-in-the-making, divided within
itself, its elements are united in rejecting old mainstream political
traditions. To become a transformative class, however, the precariat needs
to move beyond the primitive rebel stage manifested in 2011 and become
enough of a class-for-itself to be a power for change. This will involve a
struggle for redistribution of the key assets needed for a good life in a
good society in the twenty-first century –not the “means of production”,
but socioeconomic security, control of time, quality space, knowledge (or
education), financial knowledge and financial capital.​

http://www.guystanding.com/files/documents/Precariat_and_Class_Struggle_final_English.pdf


On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:49 PM, Che  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:06 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> https://thenextweb.com/contributors/2017/05/19/artificial-
>> intelligence-will-impact-professional-writing/
>>
>> How Artificial Intelligence will impact professional writing
>>
>
>
> As I keep pointing out: such technological developments could only
> constitute a 'crisis' in a society where every Human being is NOT
> guaranteed a lifetime quality-of-life. And Capitalism -- being a system of
> institutionalized *artificial* scarcity, benefiting ONLY a tiny,
> self-interested elite -- IS that infernal society.
>
> Therefore we NEED and REQUIRE *Socialism* in order to advance as a species.
>
> But as things stand -- the U.S. Imperialists are working overtime to snuff
> us all, at the moment...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> http://nypost.com/2017/08/29/artificial-intelligence-is-writ
>>> ing-the-next-game-of-thrones-book/
>>>
>>> Artificial intelligence is writing the next ‘Game of Thrones’ book
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Che]

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:06 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> https://thenextweb.com/contributors/2017/05/19/
> artificial-intelligence-will-impact-professional-writing/
>
> How Artificial Intelligence will impact professional writing
>


As I keep pointing out: such technological developments could only
constitute a 'crisis' in a society where every Human being is NOT
guaranteed a lifetime quality-of-life. And Capitalism -- being a system of
institutionalized *artificial* scarcity, benefiting ONLY a tiny,
self-interested elite -- IS that infernal society.

Therefore we NEED and REQUIRE *Socialism* in order to advance as a species.

But as things stand -- the U.S. Imperialists are working overtime to snuff
us all, at the moment...








>
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> http://nypost.com/2017/08/29/artificial-intelligence-is-writ
>> ing-the-next-game-of-thrones-book/
>>
>> Artificial intelligence is writing the next ‘Game of Thrones’ book
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Robots to replace writers.

[Axil Axil]

https://thenextweb.com/contributors/2017/05/19/artificial-intelligence-will-impact-professional-writing/

How Artificial Intelligence will impact professional writing

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> http://nypost.com/2017/08/29/artificial-intelligence-is-
> writing-the-next-game-of-thrones-book/
>
> Artificial intelligence is writing the next ‘Game of Thrones’ book
>