I can offer only so much assistance. If you agree with any of the above criticism (or do not understand) and believe she is controversial, then please provide sufficient warning. That's all.
C
chloechloechloe@musician.social
@chloechloechloe@musician.social
Posts
-
Interview: The Woman Who Predicted Tech Fascism -
Interview: The Woman Who Predicted Tech FascismTo clarify further, she supposes to be bashing the fascists and yet advances key fascist rhetoric about the dangers of autistic people and the way they interpret the world or socialize. I guess, the presentation was, at least, a great demonstration of the paradoxical nature of fascism.
I heard this presentation on Mastodon and I don't care if she has been critiqued - her ableism is being amplified /here/.
-
Interview: The Woman Who Predicted Tech FascismAll I am really saying is that the piece is exclusionary and benefits from prevailing misconceptions of autism.
-
Interview: The Woman Who Predicted Tech FascismRE: https://mastodon.social/@electric_gumball/116548276098168910
ableism:
i. it characterizes sociopaths as being essentially autistic while citing the supposed 'awareness' society /now has/.
ii. invalidates our lived experience for the sake of her critique of a (convenient and) dangerous libertarian personality type.
iii. It posits an ideal world where /meaningful/ social contribution is antithetical to autistic inclusion in society.
iv. ignores context and culture of anti-autism hype and at once describes a "journalism" challenging "power". -
"there is little evidence that the brain’s fundamental ability to concentrate has been impaired.@bms48 @grimalkina I'll try my best with this one. If you know the presenter tell him to get his stuff on peer tube.
-
"there is little evidence that the brain’s fundamental ability to concentrate has been impaired.@bms48 @grimalkina thx so much
-
"there is little evidence that the brain’s fundamental ability to concentrate has been impaired.Yes. Thx for pointing out the conflation although it is a bit of an idiosyncratic rhetorical device I use for brevity. It's habitual rather than deliberate. Ok, so yea, making allusion to neuro-divergence follows from an unenviable cognitive trap, sure. But I also think that we expect more-than-rationally from "Ai" the moment we speak of 'human values', at all, and approximating these is both an implicit deification of machine and dangerously narrow thinking .
-
"there is little evidence that the brain’s fundamental ability to concentrate has been impaired.@bms48 @grimalkina
Yes, I love that quote. Hold up a moment while I try and reply to your previous comment and clalrify my nascent understanding. ^^ -
"there is little evidence that the brain’s fundamental ability to concentrate has been impaired."Ai's ability to make extremely fine-grained yet systematic decisions cuts both ways It could make things either much better or worse, depending on whether AI systems are appropriately aligned with human values"
-- "Moral disagreement and the limits of AI value alignment" (2025)
/Yes, I see. The premise of "alignment" is completely stupid./ -
"there is little evidence that the brain’s fundamental ability to concentrate has been impaired.Just reading from article "...One concern is the /technical alignment problem/ given a desired informally specified set of goals or values, how can we imbue an AI system with them?"
At least, I can remark that I shirk from the level of personification, here.
I might also add a quote from Nietzsche: "Only individuals feel responsibility". I feel this is apt and even if we reach a modern Prometheus machine with general intelligence.
-
"there is little evidence that the brain’s fundamental ability to concentrate has been impaired.@grimalkina Thanks for sharing this. My capstone project for programming was essentially based on such a view. With so many competing interests how can we harness executive control? That there is also a narrative of neuro-determinism is new for me but not entirely surprising either! ^^