<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000">Well, most of us do OK with rage and lust, but many don't. Some redirect those and don't hurt some blameless victims. Getting control over emotions is a lifelong task and none of us do it perfectly, meditation or not.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000">Rage can take place in fantasies no one ever knows about, as one displacement. Kick the dog - (no, not the other).</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000">So, sometimes choosing a displacement can make the frustration even worse.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000">If in your fantasies you commit atrocities, is that OK?</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large;color:#000000">bill w</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 8:45 AM <efc@swisscows.email> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">But I have heard of many people who through meditation and therapy have <br>
overcome rage and lust.<br>
<br>
Granted, it is a fuzzy subject, so it could be that I misunderstand your <br>
point.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
Daniel<br>
<br>
<br>
On Thu, 23 Nov 2023, William Flynn Wallace via extropy-chat wrote:<br>
<br>
> Good luck telling the unconscious what to do. Haidt, I think, thought of ourselves as riding an elephant - the rider being the ego<br>
> and the elephant being the unconscious. The elephant can take over at any point and overwhelm the ego, like a mad elephant doing<br>
> exactly what it wants and the Hell with the rider. No suggestions on how to alter this. Rage or lust comes to mind. Even hunger.<br>
> <br>
> bill w<br>
> <br>
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 4:40 AM efc--- via extropy-chat <<a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a>> wrote:<br>
> Hello Jason,<br>
><br>
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2023, Jason Resch via extropy-chat wrote:<br>
><br>
> > > then humans would no longer be in control, even if individual LLMs are no smarter than human engineers).<br>
> ><br>
> > I don't think humans have been in control for a long time, certainly<br>
> > not individual humans, and I just don't believe in "elders" or any<br>
> > other group that is exerting control. Every single human is like a<br>
> > wood chip on a river.<br>
> ><br>
> > I appreciate this analogy very much. I have sometimes thought similar things as well, that the greatest and scariest<br>
> conspiracy<br>
> > theory of all is that no one is in control.<br>
><br>
> This reminds me of daoist poetry where we are floating on the river.<br>
> Best thing we can do is to adapt to the current, instead of tring to<br>
> swim against it all our lives.<br>
><br>
> In terms of conspiracies, I am a firm believer in there being no global<br>
> conspiracies. Just like you, I believ in large scale moves and trends,<br>
> and I also believe that groups of people try to take advantage of them.<br>
> They do not control the trends (as individuals) but try and divert small<br>
> currents here and there.<br>
><br>
> Another reason I do not beleive in global, unified conspiracies is that<br>
> people talk. It would be, in my opinion, impossible, to keep such things<br>
> secret.<br>
><br>
> > But the river analogy adds another dimension which I think is more correct. We are subject to overarching trends and<br>
> laws of<br>
> > evolution, technological development, economics, etc. and we individual humans are like cells in this greater<br>
> organism, all in the<br>
> > end replaceable cogs whose presence or absence might make a small difference as to when some inevitable discovery might<br>
> happen, but<br>
> > will not prevent it entirely.<br>
><br>
> Enter "psycho-history"! ;) I agree. There are fundamental laws that<br>
> govern how we work, and this of course influences us as a species. I<br>
> always thought about if some kind of law of "unification" or<br>
> "centralization" can be verbalized or formalized? It seems, through<br>
> history, that we have an innate tendency to try at unify our knowledge,<br>
> and that our societies keep getting more and more centralized compared<br>
> with individual families or groups on the savannah hundreds of thousands<br>
> of year ago.<br>
><br>
> Then you also have the mystical psycho-analysts who argue that until we<br>
> consciously realize and take control over our unconscious drives and<br>
> desires, we'll keep making the same mistakes as we always do.<br>
><br>
> > > I think depth of reasoning may be one area where the best humans are currently dominant, but a small tweak,<br>
> such as<br>
> > giving LLMs a working memory and recursion, as well as tightening up their ability to make multiple deductive<br>
> logical<br>
> > steps/leaps, could quickly change this.<br>
> ><br>
> > Can you make a case that it would be worse than the current situation?<br>
> ><br>
> > I don't believe it will, but if tasked to make the case, I would say the greatest present danger is that it amplifies<br>
> the agency of<br>
> > any user. So that ill-willed people might become more destructively capable than they otherwise would (e.g. the common<br>
> example of a<br>
> > lone terrorist leveraging the AI's expertise in biotechnology to make a new pathogen) but the Internet has already done<br>
> this to a<br>
> > lesser extent. I think agency amplification applies to everyone, and since there are more good-intentioned people than<br>
> > ill-intentioned ones, any generally-available amplification technology tends to be a net positive for humanity.<br>
><br>
> I think it is very interesting to think about what current LLMs and<br>
> video generation capabilities are doing to drive down the cost of<br>
> producing fake news. It will cost next to nothing and flood everything.<br>
><br>
> Open AI and "containing AI" is just a mirage and every single powerful<br>
> nation are likely trying their best to come up with the best AI in order<br>
> to out compete the rivals.<br>
><br>
> I wonder if we'll have some kind of cold war type situation where the<br>
> most powerful nations have their own AI:s and the rest of the world then<br>
> has to align themselves with them taking one side or the other?<br>
><br>
> Best regards,<br>
> Daniel<br>
> <br>
><br>
> ><br>
> > Jason <br>
> ><br>
> >_______________________________________________<br>
> extropy-chat mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org" target="_blank">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
> <br>
> <br>
></blockquote></div>