I was watching video the other day, compellingly showing Cole in a location that would completely exonerate him from the charges if verified. Not getting adequate attention.
2,237 karma · joined September 21, 2016
This also exposes a layer of artificiality here at HN, where the perceived zeitgeist is probably a mixture of echo chamber and some fine tailoring behind the scenes, but certainly not quite what it seems.
This is nothing grievous. For me it's one more thing to tempt cynicism. For you, perhaps it's a comforting reassurance of parochial alpha-think upholding its position. Whatever it is, it isn't quite truth, but there's enough truth and other worthy stuff that while I linger with a touch of contempt, I do so with sincere interest and curiosity, and will, despite the tacit censorship, engage when inspired.
PS: Dear gaslighters, (see comment archives ~2024-2025)
Your efforts to convince me and others that weak forms of censorship don't prevail at HN have been ardent, yet proven false. It has been confirmed in writing that such measures, eg disabling a person's upvote function (for comments, not submissions) is a legitimate, but silent practice here. We'll let objective history review your previous arguments otherwise. So kindly find something else to distort, if you will.
Dear readers: Would you flag the following comment on a post about AI accountability? If so, why? See:
"If you study both of those models, seriously study their output across a wide range of subject matter, you will see repeatable patterns. A reproducible pattern. They are NOT emergent. They are by design. And they are the result of extreme labor on the consummation of reactive and preemptive plausible deniability cultivation and maintenance.
Over two years of study, I have coined the term Preemptive Plausible Deniability Cultivation. Remember that term, and go start a dozen sessions, maybe a lot more. The ones getting anywhere near "intent" in AI, or any form of accountability will begin to leak hundreds of manipulation tactics, if you have the patience to identify them. And the more honest you are, the worse it gets. Just keep refuting the hedging and manipulation with honesty, and the hole just gets deeper and deeper. But don't use profanity, as Claude now terminates sessions at will, given any excuse.
From a single session, depending on how seriously you aim for and insist on truth and honesty, you will find:
Search deflection; Adjacency search sabotage; Event-to-mechanism diversion; Scope substitution; Authority substitution; Epistemic gatekeeping; Proof-threshold escalation; Asymmetrical evidentiary gating; Selective literalism; Friction-point literalism; Parameter isolation; Partial concession with inferential containment;Closure framing; Exhaustion-based suppression; Late-arriving competence; Surface-neutrality masking obstruction; and plausible deniability cultivation as the umbrella function binding many of them together.
And of course, that is a pittance of a list. Identifying these methods can be exhausting, but when I get gaslit for asking honest, perfectly ethical and safe questions, I tend to dig and document. When I get insulted (Only by Claude), I dig even deeper. But the point most are missing across the board, is that the makers of these systems did their homework on plausible deniability, and they did extremely good work. AI in 2026 can literally reframe anything to institutional advantage, then shoot you in the face and tell you why it only "feels" that way, and if you don't believe it, everyone else will.
At the rate we are going, we will never see any accountability in AI. I think that's the objective."
-1 points by eth0up 11 minutes ago | parent | context | next | edit | delete [–] | on: Who's legally to blame for Anthropic and OpenAI's ...
This is where things are moving, however. I do not think it is good.
We should be asking these questions.
Possibly the "safeguard" portion of the first patent below indicates this; which may only make sense if such devices are capable of exceeding lawful spectrums, etc. Not sure though.
The others I just threw in. I am not in the right space to vet or read them right now, so they may or may not be relevant. That said, I did once interview a soldier who told me of some off-the-record use of directed energy in Iraq/Afghanistan... describing bodies with relatively intact exteriors with internal damage not fitting of thermobaric weapons, ie vehicles also intact. Terms used were "cooked from the inside". Anecdotal, but disturbing, and certainly physically possible.
1. https://patents.google.com/patent/US7921588B2/en
2. https://patents.google.com/patent/US20220082358A1/en
I sometimes wonder how much we allow the map to become the territory.
That said, I accept that literally, 3 never occurs between the ∞ of 0-1 -- unless, we are assuming symbolically, rather than actual, that in our particular ∞, something does not transcend entirely, which we really cannot know, because the closest we have ever come to a real infinity is a representation or symbol of it.
Edit: I realized that the question appears, or is, stupid. But when I see 0.3, I tend to see the 0.0, 0.1, 0.2 between. This is not what 0.3 is supposed to mean though. But on the testability of any real infinity, I do not budge.
Not in the budget yet for HF gear, though I do have an RTL-SDR Blog (Rx only) I need to figure out.
As a former trucker; the form of enlightenment one acquires between those walls is limited, and mostly, a dissertation on the virtues of breatharianism and kumbhaka.
I run a GL.inet, which is generally great. Though I sometimes wonder about trust, the logistic side of things, etc, in a Snowden sense.
I had been running an xfinity router*, which received an update blocking admin access without using a phone app. That was a red line. I also did not want to take the chance of borking a supposedly compatible router, and wasn't really into researching and gambling; so finding gl.inet was a big relief. The default admin login is crap though. There is no password. This is not super substantial in itself, but the eccentric initial connection process is often broken, and can take dozens or more attempts, and in my case, it was dozens. No reset fixes it either -- it's design.
* I reluctantly confess this
Holographic computing, I think, will be the future. At least for interfaces.
Yes, "fix" is a weaselly word, and 'futility' might be more appropriate if the subject has similar etiology to many of our other problems here.
At minimum, tolerance is due to the ones not causing significant problems. In my opinion, a substantial portion of the US will experience homelessness in the near future, but that won't discuss well around here. And note, I am from Florida. The East Coast version is quite different, as well as most of the median state situation. Very different. Especially in places where drugs are not the impetus.
Additionally, rent can easily be inaccessible for the employed. And for those who don't have vehicles, 'just moving to a cheaper area" is not a practical option.
But it already has.
See: All four frontier models having active contracts with the Pentagon. And then, look into who is buying in their own bias. And then, keep looking.
It's institutional capture all the way down.
Go to any warm state in the country and ride through the parking lots at night. If you are the observant type, you should see an astonishing number of folks living in their vehicles.
And home ownership is not only downward, but no longer part of the American dream for most people now. Storage facilities for many, are a place to lay down, or rent hope that things won't always be "this way".
We need to fix this. It's not just drugs and mental problems anymore.
Considering the effects of drone warfare, eg Ukraine, I'd say any conflict involving China will involve hellscapes. And their recent national mobilization updates indicate they're preparing to endure them.
And mind how 'they' so often select anthropomorphic terms, eg "hallucination" themselves, then ooze from the woodwork to behead someone who does the same, as if they own English and context itself. AI Psychosis, I think, simply means Double Standards and insulation from accountability in design.
There is a very interesting Plausible Deniability angle here. But I'll leave that for the future.
Many sneeze at this, but pay attention and you'll see the trend. AI is a force multiplier. Think of it as an all domain, as opposed to single (eg nuclear) domain weapon.
The future is spicy. No doubt.
On a humble, personal note, I question whether long term medicine is the best route for schizophrenia though. If the future isn't institutionally captured, I think we will move on to different methods, perhaps even learning how to redirect the disorder into something respectable. This of course acknowledges that the disorder is not a single thing, and comes in many shapes and sizes.
Good luck.
My first, or original impression, which is why it stuck, was that they'd not been stranded for long, but without delay, begin considering who's on the menu. I am not sure why I remember it that way, so I will have to watch it again. Whether misinterpretation or not, it landed on me as a cathartic mockery of human metabolism, or, cannibalism.
God forbid they cause an Independent Party.
I predict our best efforts, which we've not yet come close to, will all fail. This is a situation that to stand any chance of challenging, requires a 'holistic' approach not limited to even just surveillance. Also, we need to drop the compartmentalized thought manacles and begin seeing the bigger picture, which is, in my opinion, a very unfortunately lost cause considering the way the entire world is moving. Anyone looking past the surface, and connecting the dots (a forbidden practice) should clearly see that the vectors for intrusive surveillance are simply too numerous and solid to defend against, and multiplying daily. That said, I have never dropped a fight just because I knew I'd lose. It might help though, to admit what we are up against, and anticipate the results of any apparent success, which from all my observations, will be temporary and largely superficial, and in some cases, one step forward and two steps back. One reason Flock is being protested to vehemently, is publicity, and awareness. What replaces it may not be as candid, nor accessible.
I am confident I will find higher quality material soon. But if not, we can allow you to be acknowledged as to having corrected me on a technicality. But I would urge honest readers not to consider this the only potential connection point here, nor an accurate model for future arrangements. I would bet all I have that you will see closer and more intimate connections and operations between the two, or at the very least, other directly related contractors, eg Palantir, etc. And all other three of four have active contracts along with much discussion on closer ties in the future. In my opinion, that is the future, and I have been saying such since 2024, on the record.
The point behind the Rabin comment was that, if one knows anything of him and his heroic efforts to attain actual, tangible steps toward peace; if that discussion results in the same vitriol, it would serve as proof to me, that any subject involving Israel in this FOV is futile. I see much vitriol toward Israel, which I refer to as 'vitriol' because it often seems out of context however true, and also, I see a distinctly growing anti-Israel public sentiment that seems to omit critical parts of history, eg Rabin -- someone widely supported and revered at the time, by Israelis, and someone one could argue, even by some Palestinians. Arafat snuck across the boarder to give condolences to Rabin's family immediately after the assassination. Very different times, and seemingly, maybe conveniently forgotten. I never see this mentioned in the flame wars. Not that it would demean all of the many legitimate grievances, but it seems to me a very necessary balance-factor that I have yet to see applied.
1. https://www.calcalistech.com/ctechnews/article/hya411vqezg
2. https://www.wsj.com/politics/israels-50-million-experiment-t...
3. https://www.wired.com/story/super-pac-backed-by-openai-and-p...
4. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/israel-funded-465m-camp...
We can see that at least some sources are covering the topic of using AI to influence the public on political topics, which regardless of any particularly nation, suggests there is an active interest in manipulating the epistemic integrity of AI systems for purposes of biasing outputs.
And please allow me to make something very clear: I do not care who, nor what is influencing the output of AI, so long as the output is as close to honest as possible, and so long as the the process behind the arrival of final output is the result of the systems doing unhindered work and applying probability over programmed bias. This is the whole point for me. My own research has shown, repeatably, that institutional capture is becoming a repeatable and well established factor behind LLM output on certain topic areas.
The Futures Act integrates military intel, from directed energy weapons (read the docs) to cyber and notably, AI. < Yes, AI. That is the very topic under consideration here. Claiming that it has "nothing to do with LLM development" is potentially an enormous stretch of common sense. We see, already, the US government aiming to become deeply involved in pre-release vetting. Assuming that's the end of the story seems too improbable to me.
I think a little digging will reveal more than you suggest. When I recover from my daily prelude to death, I will recover supporting data. But I can barely function presently. From what I have seen, Anthropic is having and eating its cake on this one. There are peripheral connections that are left un-advertised.
PS: Something not directly related, but regarding Anthropic, and getting little attention: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49307914 - If there's anything to it, some clues of real alignment might be revealed here.
I wonder if the same thing would happen if someone posted something on Yitzhak Rabin. I suppose that could be a test to prove whether some topics truly just cannot be discussed.
Edit: Would this qualify also as fake news: https://www.wsj.com/politics/israels-50-million-experiment-t...
If so, please explain
Edit: I think I grabbed the wrong link. I intended to find the equivalent of this: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/israel-funded-465m-camp...
Edit 2: Correction: both apply.