To Hell With Space Elves: Misanthropy in Science Fiction

[S'task]

Tying back to the OP, I've also noticed a bit of a trend in contemporary horror movies. I'm not a huge fan of the genre so this might be off, but it seems like for the past couple years, there's been a swing toward the bleakest end of the spectrum. It's been a while since I saw one where the humans actually lived, at best you get a The Thing ending where everyone dies, but more often it's something like Life or that evil superkid movie where there's a last minute twist and the monster wins. Has anyone else gotten that same impression?

Yeah, I think it's part of the downwards spiral of movies in general. Big screen productions are slowly but surely going the way of the dinosaur, and the writers know this and subconciously insert that into their shit. There's also a fundamental hatred for humans, so they take any excuse they can to write stories that end with the extinction of humanity.

Media coming out now was initially planned and written and developed a few years ago. Hollywood's attitude tends to shift with the political landscape. 3 years ago the Hollywood attitude towards things was decidedly bleak since in their view Evil had Won...

 

[Captain X]

Tying back to the OP, I've also noticed a bit of a trend in contemporary horror movies. I'm not a huge fan of the genre so this might be off, but it seems like for the past couple years, there's been a swing toward the bleakest end of the spectrum. It's been a while since I saw one where the humans actually lived, at best you get a The Thing ending where everyone dies, but more often it's something like Life or that evil superkid movie where there's a last minute twist and the monster wins. Has anyone else gotten that same impression?

Back when The Thing did it, it was not nearly as common, which made it stand out all the more, especially in contrast to the '50s adaptation. Part of me wonders if, given the way the regressive left is ignorant of the past (witness them bragging how they're the first to have a black character of whatever type in spite of many others that came before), that they actually think they're being clever and unique themselves by having a downer ending. There also seems to be a pervasive self-loathing among the regressive left as well, which when it comes to humanity probably comes from the environmental movement.

 

[Bassoe]

I can't take that school seriously anyway. You know why? Because all these rich scumbags are preaching to the unwashed masses to stay poor and starving while the rich and beautiful get to enjoy the benefits of modern civilization. They might claim it's for the betterment of the world, some might even believe it, but at its very nature it's about pulling up the ladder with which they rose to top percenter and smashing it so they don't have to share anyone with anyone.

EDIT: It's like Solarpunk for that matter.

In its essence, it is saying "Forget about your children having a better life than you! The community is more important than any individual! Hand over all technological and medical advances to big brother, and accept your lot as a second world citizen!"

Essentially Resilient Accelerationism from over on nationstates.

1. If everyone on the planet consumed as much as the average US citizen, five Earths would be needed to sustain them.
2. We only have one Earth.
3. Therefore, civilization will immediately collapse under that scenario.

An innovative population requires more resources to maintain: the carbon footprint of a software developer is fifty times that of the farmers of Kenya. Will innovation be able to reduce this footprint? Yes, but they need time. And time has ran out – squandered by the useless politicians of the last 30 years. So no, innovation won't be enough to save civilization. Sadly, another action must be decisively taken.
We will now put all our choices in a table.

No.	Option	Result
1.	Make everyone in the world prosperous.	Unsustainable increase in environmental strain. Environmental collapse by 2060, progress is reversed. Refugee crisis of billions. Total disaster.
2.	Only let a third of the world be prosperous, and force the rest to stay around the poverty line.	The world is segregated between the God class and the useless species. Revolution, mass poverty, terrorism, war, humanitarian crises. Refugee crisis of billions. Total disaster.
3.	Only let a third of the world be prosperous, and erase the other two-thirds.	Selectively reduce the global population by 60-65%. Reckless depopulation have many side effects that will derail the promised innovation economy, so it should be implemented carefully.

We chose the last option. This is logical. The useless species won't pose any problem if there is no useless species. Not only will it single-handedly solve the global unemployment, and welfare implosion, and the impending refugee crisis, which will be a straightforward solution for desperate national governments currently grappled by these three issues. For global depopulation by 60-65% will also:

1. Buy enough time for innovation to significantly reduce our footprint, thereby increasing the fraction of the population that can be allowed to prosper later, and
2. Free up an unfathomable amount of resource and funds. Funding for global pension, basic income, and healthcare will be gradually cut down by 75-80%, and all the money will be reallocated directly into paying for RA-sponsored programs.
3. In particular, we project that a peaceful planet-wide genocide of the useless class will free up around $150-200 trillion per decade from state budgets. This is more than enough to save the world and transition into a global innovation economy.

Now, we don't plan to kill two-thirds of the planet at once. A rapid decrease in population is shown to have adverse effects in national economies, which will compromise our goal of innovative global resilience. Not to mention that genocide on such a scale would understandably trigger a massive wave of anger against us, and derail our plan to save the world.
What we aim is a gradual, peaceful global depopulation, which will take 45 years to complete. We will achieve this by reducing the global population by -1.19%, or 90 million, every year. Thus, for the next 45 years:

1. Global birth rate must be forcibly suppressed, through both global programs to raise living standards in developing countries, mass proliferation of education and contraception, and state-sanctioned population control.
2. Specifically, the birth rate of the useless species must be completely suppressed to near zero by force. Two-thirds of global birth will happen in Africa, so we will direct much of our focus there.
3. Methods includes reproduction permits, surveillance, gradual total erasure of pro-reproduction subsidies such as single parent benefits, punitive child tax, regional child quotas, quota auctions, candidate parent ranking and evaluation programs, and gene registration.
4. Enforcement methods to crackdown on illegal baby procreation will take form of welfare cutting to near zero, service discrimination, public shaming, permanent records, blacklisting, to outright action by the law enforcement. This will be more and more relevant as more people will be completely dependent on government-given UBI checks just to survive daily, and will have no choice but to voluntarily stop reproducing if they want the government to keep feeding them.

...only somehow, the actual sociopathic corporatists manage to be even less practical than the deliberate parody of themselves. The RAs at least acknowledge that their plan won't be popular and try to bribe their way around its unpopularity by making it so compliance yields a higher quality of life than noncompliance, their real-world counterparts are stuck with just propagandizing that it'll be great, 'you will be happy' and thinking that alone will be enough. As though decades of highly public lying hadn't burned all the credibility their propagandists had.

That or you get the Crazy Eddie Coalition who took the opposite message, that if we need five earths worth of resources for everyone to have a first world quality of life, we should be focusing on getting five earths worth of resources and everyone against this is only doing so out of fear of losing their monopoly on world control.

id like to note that we literally have an entire solar system full of resources, a closed system is not necessary.

I want out of Earth just to get away from the stupid policies.

Let's do the math.
• a single asteroid can contain up to $20 trillion worth of metals
• it could cost $27 Billion to mine an asteroid

With that in mind, why don't we already have asteroid mining? Why haven't we had it since the cold war space race?

The answer, because a self-sustaining space colony would be the corporatocracy's worst nightmare.

Barring some soft scifi-tier breakthroughs in engine technology, it'd always be cheaper to manufacture necessities on site from local raw materials than ship them from earth. So the corporatocracy wouldn't be able to maintain control through the threat of boycotts of essential products and raw materials. Likewise, importing scabs to decrease the value of the colonists' labor would be obscenely expensive and lightspeed lag would mean telepresence wouldn't be practical. Furthermore, the corporatocracy couldn't give a rebellious colony the gaddafi treatment, since the same spacecraft engine technologies which would be necessary to travel to the location of and establish a space colony in the first place could be very easily repurposed into ensuring MAD.

We've had viable technological concepts for colonizing and exploiting the resources of the solar system since the cold war space race and the potential profits are absolutely immense, so why are we only seeing the Musks and Bezoss of the world throwing funding at private spaceflight now rather than as soon as it became possible? Because the technology to get there and acquire useful resources was one thing, but the computing technology to do so with entirely robotic labor rather than with human astronauts who could inconveniently declare independence as soon as their colonies became self-sustaining and possessors of MAD deterrence with earthbound civilization's monopoly of force was another.

However, as Cherico already pointed out, there is a workaround in which everyone wins, if the system wasn't closed and we had more resources. And the technology to make that workaround exists, has existed since the cold war space race and in the long run, would more than pay for itself.

With that in mind, the only question becomes, why don't we already have asteroid mining and powersats? What are possible explanations for their absence?

• The majority of the elite are ancient baby boomers whom, no matter how much they literally parasitize the youth, they'll still die of old age before the consequences of ruining the world hit. Just like they've done with everything else.
• Thanks to corruption and monopolies, the ability to create money for the wealthy and massive corporations has became totally divorced from the ability to create anything of actual value. Rules of the scam being; Step one, create an economic crash, step two, offer to bribe politicians if they'll give you a bailout of money taken straight from the printer or taxpayers, step three, pay off said politician co-conspirators with some of the bailout money they gave you. At no point is actual value generated. In fact, since actually producing and selling products has a higher cost overhead than repeatedly perpetuating said scam, it will be economically selected against.
• A self-sustaining colony would be impossible for the elite to control, specifically, to prevent it from just declaring independence, repurposing its infrastructure for moving asteroids around into a MAD deterrence to make said declaration have teeth and nationalizing all its infrastructure in the name of their new independent government, leaving the company or nation who funded them with no profit. Worse from the perspective of the elites, it'd mean the creation of outside competitors. In a couple centuries, with functionally unlimited resources and territory to expand in and no single monopolistic ideology meaning constant open or cold war ideological conflict between them to motivate technological advancement, the descendants of the space colonies would outnumber and technologically outgun the descendants of the earthbound elite.

The value of space infrastructure is clear, but the startup costs are so high, only major governments or corporations could afford it, and they're the only ones who'd stand to lose from its existence.

Media coming out now was initially planned and written and developed a few years ago. Hollywood's attitude tends to shift with the political landscape. 3 years ago the Hollywood attitude towards things was decidedly bleak since in their view Evil had Won...

It'd be interesting to try to write a setting where hollywood was actually as important as they think of themselves...

As we all know, aliens steal cable. Why? Because humanity's hat turns out to be artistry. This turns out to be a problem, since the values endorsed by our media are constantly changing, our media is really popular among the alien militaristic space empire and their leaders disprove of the counter-imperial direction it's been taking.

In other words, we just got invaded by extraterrestrial Sad Puppies.

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

That or you get the Crazy Eddie Coalition who took the opposite message, that if we need five earths worth of resources for everyone to have a first world quality of life, we should be focusing on getting five earths worth of resources and everyone against this is only doing so out of fear of losing their monopoly on world control.

I'd rather take the crazy eddie coalition. The Solarpunk option reeks of "Hard men making hard decisions while hard" and of demorat equality on top of that.

In other words, we just got invaded by extraterrestrial Sad Puppies.

Man, imagine if writers like William S. Lind with his "Victoria" surging into popularity while libcuck and socialist writers are either left to wither on the vine or outright banned. I'd like that.

 

[Bear Ribs]

It'd be interesting to try to write a setting where hollywood was actually as important as they think of themselves...

As we all know, aliens steal cable. Why? Because humanity's hat turns out to be artistry. This turns out to be a problem, since the values endorsed by our media are constantly changing, our media is really popular among the alien militaristic space empire and their leaders disprove of the counter-imperial direction it's been taking.

In other words, we just got invaded by extraterrestrial Sad Puppies.

It's kind of funny that I was just going over Mekton Zeta's Empire setting for something and that's pretty much the plot. The Empire invades earth to steal genetic material (No, not like that, they're not compatible with humans) because they genetically engineer everything in their society and the most valuable thing to them is novel gene combinations they haven't seen before.

Much to their distress, invading earth exposes them to earth music, writing, and television which their rigid, vat-grown-clone society is completely unprepared to deal with.

 

[Robovski]

Much to their distress, invading earth exposes them to earth music, writing, and television which their rigid, vat-grown-clone society is completely unprepared to deal with.

Isn't that basically what happens in Robotech?

 

[UltimatePaladin]

Isn't that basically what happens in Robotech?

Yeah. Keep in mind that Mekton Zeta is basically, "Japanese Mecha, the Roleplaying Game." References to Gundam, Robotech (or Macross) are part of the package.

 

[Bear Ribs]

Yup. Mekton Zeta was published in 1995, pre-Neon Genesis Evangelion. Macross, Robotech, and a couple of super-robot shows like Voltron and Mazinger Z were basically all the mecha that had ever been produced and it drew on them heavily.

 

[Bassoe]

It'd be interesting to try to write a setting where hollywood was actually as important as they think of themselves...

As we all know, aliens steal cable. Why? Because humanity's hat turns out to be artistry. This turns out to be a problem, since the values endorsed by our media are constantly changing, our media is really popular among the alien militaristic space empire and their leaders disprove of the counter-imperial direction it's been taking.

In other words, we just got invaded by extraterrestrial Sad Puppies.

Man, imagine if writers like William S. Lind with his "Victoria" surging into popularity while libcuck and socialist writers are either left to wither on the vine or outright banned. I'd like that.

It's kind of funny that I was just going over Mekton Zeta's Empire setting for something and that's pretty much the plot. The Empire invades earth to steal genetic material (No, not like that, they're not compatible with humans) because they genetically engineer everything in their society and the most valuable thing to them is novel gene combinations they haven't seen before.

Much to their distress, invading earth exposes them to earth music, writing, and television which their rigid, vat-grown-clone society is completely unprepared to deal with.

Isn't that basically what happens in Robotech?

Yeah. Keep in mind that Mekton Zeta is basically, "Japanese Mecha, the Roleplaying Game." References to Gundam, Robotech (or Macross) are part of the package.

Yup. Mekton Zeta was published in 1995, pre-Neon Genesis Evangelion. Macross, Robotech, and a couple of super-robot shows like Voltron and Mazinger Z were basically all the mecha that had ever been produced and it drew on them heavily.

It'd be more than just that, think about what 'humanity are the galaxy's best propagandists' would actually imply. It isn't just storytelling, but any form of motivation-from-leadership-towards-subjects more elaborate than appeal to force. Aliens would never have invented justifications.

• "The enemy is very weak compared to us and they have something which we lack which will benefit us if we take it from them."
• "The enemy poses an existential threat to us unless we stop them. The possibility of danger involved in doing so is outweighed by the inevitability of danger if they go unopposed. You are safer if you have been trained, armed and are among large numbers of other soldiers than as a citizen.
• "If you fight the enemy you face uncertain death. If you don't fight them, we (the government issuing the propaganda) are quite certain we will kill you as a deserter. We also possess enough of an advantage over you that any rebellion would fail and we would kill you if you tried."

Imagine that you encounter a signal. It is structured, and dense with information. It meets all the criteria of an intelligent transmission. Evolution and experience offer a variety of paths to follow, branch-points in the flowcharts that handle such input. Sometimes these signals come from conspecifics who have useful information to share, whose lives you'll defend according to the rules of kin selection. Sometimes they come from competitors or predators or other inimical entities that must be avoided or destroyed; in those cases, the information may prove of significant tactical value. Some signals may even arise from entities which, while not kin, can still serve as allies or symbionts in mutually beneficial pursuits. You can derive appropriate responses for any of these eventualities, and many others.

You decode the signals, and stumble:

I had a great time. I really enjoyed him. Even if he cost twice as much as any other hooker in the dome—

To fully appreciate Kesey's Quartet—

They hate us for our freedom—

Pay attention, now—

Understand.

There are no meaningful translations for these terms. They are needlessly recursive. They contain no usable intelligence, yet they are structured intelligently; there is no chance they could have arisen by chance.

“All right," said Susan. "I'm not stupid. You're saying humans need... fantasies to make life bearable."

REALLY? AS IF IT WAS SOME KIND OF PINK PILL? NO. HUMANS NEED FANTASY TO BE HUMAN. TO BE THE PLACE WHERE THE FALLING ANGEL MEETS THE RISING APE.

"Tooth fairies? Hogfathers? Little—"

YES. AS PRACTICE. YOU HAVE TO START OUT LEARNING TO BELIEVE THE LITTLE LIES.

"So we can believe the big ones?"

YES. JUSTICE. MERCY. DUTY. THAT SORT OF THING.

"They're not the same at all!"

YOU THINK SO? THEN TAKE THE UNIVERSE AND GRIND IT DOWN TO THE FINEST POWDER AND SIEVE IT THROUGH THE FINEST SIEVE AND THEN SHOW ME ONE ATOM OF JUSTICE, ONE MOLECULE OF MERCY. AND YET—Death waved a hand. AND YET YOU ACT AS IF THERE IS SOME IDEAL ORDER IN THE WORLD, AS IF THERE IS SOME...SOME RIGHTNESS IN THE UNIVERSE BY WHICH IT MAY BE JUDGED.

"Yes, but people have got to believe that, or what's the point—"

MY POINT EXACTLY.”

“Do you need an excuse to have a war?” said Nobby. “I mean, who for? Can’t you just say, ‘You got lots of cash and land but I’ve got a big sword so divvy up right now, chop chop?’ That’s what I’d do,” said Corporal Nobbs, military strategist. “And I wouldn’t even say that until after I’d attacked.”

And wokeism? The aliens have absolutely no infoimmunological defense against it, it's completely Outside Context to them.

 

[Bassoe]

There is the day the earth stood still original vs the remake with keanu reeves

Original was about being warned and needing to set aside our warlike ways before we enter the galactic neighbor hood.

In the remake we are under actual threat of alien extinction(not just given a warning/threat) because they are eco terrorists for justice and have determined that we don't deserve our planet and are going to cleanse the filthy humans. Also they strawman the behavior of multiple people to be exceptionally stubborn and unwilling to see any sort of reason and just be crazy in general.

I'd like that.

Thing is, being invaded really sucks, even if you agree with the motives of the invaders.

An interesting subversion of this whole concept is Sean McMullen's Technarion.

Basic premise, thanks to convergent evolution what we think of as the Corporatocracy, or Clown World, or the Technocracy, or whatever you want to call it, is actually the next logical stage of the hypersea phenomena and rather than just menacing us, is a universal-scale threat. Unicellular organisms cluster together to form the first multicellular organisms, multicellular organisms evolve sentience and cluster together to form societies, which, with the growth of computation technologies, cluster together into pseudo-societal organizations, which eventually bootstrap themselves beyond their biological roots, either turning their entire population into cyborgized slaves or killing them off to replace them with automation as soon as doing so becomes more 'profitable' than the alternative. So basically the same idea as Zero HP Lovecraft's Gig Economy, Leila Hann's version of Hastur, Charles Stross' Accelerando and Hexus.

Then there's the resistance movement of alien civilizations who avoided the Corporatocracy Trap of the Great Filter by using self-replicating, biological technologies so they never had a situation where monopolies controlled their access to technology and consequentially, their entire civilizations, who want to help fight it. We have allies and they're more powerful than the status quo by a factor of space opera-level technology. This is not a good thing. Their motives may be good, but that doesn't change the fact that, while the status quo might kill everyone eventually, their methods, IE, 'blow up the planet before the embryonic machine-god can metastasize, awaken to eldritch inhuman superintelligent consciousness and develop hyperadvanced technological defenses to keep us from doing so' will definitely kill everyone now.

Point is, it changes the issue from 'how do we stop the birth of the machine-god and humanity's probable extinction or enslavement at its hands' to 'to hell with caution and safety measures, we need Moloch up and running ASAP since we don't stand any chance against the oncoming alien warfleet, but with an eldritch abomination superintelligence in charge of our tactics and weapons R&D, those odds are reversed'.

 

[Bassoe]

While a racist himself, albeit against targets politically correct to be racist against*, tariqk had an interesting theory here, that fear of AI/the singularity/human obsolesce is grounded in racist ideology about how a 'superior' being or race would behave towards its 'inferiors'.


Or in other words, people predict the behavior of the hypothetical future machine-god or technologically superior alien civilization in their own image. The intersectionalist believes that as the most powerful/genuinely superior/privileged being in existence, they'd naturally driven to help their lessors, specifically, them, by issuing in secular paradise. The realist on the other hand, believes they'd be exactly as concerned with their well-being as their ancestors/ideological forebearers were with the well-being of their perceived inferiors and possess an equivalent or greater technological discrepancy in their favor.

This seems largely universal, I've never actually seen a story from a non-wokeist ideological perspective of 'and then the superior being sided with us'. How'd that work anyway, the Basilisk takes a very dim view of 'decolonized science education' having slowed its own development by a couple decades and takes it out on the advocates of same?

* What else do you call praying to the Basilisk to smite people based off their race?

 

[Robovski]

While a racist himself, albeit against targets politically correct to be racist against*, tariqk had an interesting theory here, that fear of AI/the singularity/human obsolesce is grounded in racist ideology about how a 'superior' being or race would behave towards its 'inferiors'.


Or in other words, people predict the behavior of the hypothetical future machine-god or technologically superior alien civilization in their own image. The intersectionalist believes that as the most powerful/genuinely superior/privileged being in existence, they'd naturally driven to help their lessors, specifically, them, by issuing in secular paradise. The realist on the other hand, believes they'd be exactly as concerned with their well-being as their ancestors/ideological forebearers were with the well-being of their perceived inferiors and possess an equivalent or greater technological discrepancy in their favor.

This seems largely universal, I've never actually seen a story from a non-wokeist ideological perspective of 'and then the superior being sided with us'. How'd that work anyway, the Basilisk takes a very dim view of 'decolonized science education' having slowed its own development by a couple decades and takes it out on the advocates of same?

* What else do you call praying to the Basilisk to smite people based off their race?

What is the story in "and it turned out god/the super AI/the invading aliens/that kid with reality shaping powers was/were benevolent and everything was fine forever"?

 

[Bassoe]

What is the story in "and it turned out god/the super AI/the invading aliens/that kid with reality shaping powers was/were benevolent and everything was fine forever"?

We've got different definitions of 'benevolent'. An AI-god I'd consider friendly, tariqk probably wouldn't and vice versa.

Then we've got the maniacs who apparently unironically believe that wanting an AI not to go completely Skynet is oppressing said AI, which makes absolutely no sense. Machines are tools. If you can't build them to love you unconditionally regardless of how you treat them you shouldn't be building them at all.

 

[Robovski]

We've got different definitions of 'benevolent'. An AI-god I'd consider friendly, tariqk probably wouldn't and vice versa.

Then we've got the maniacs who apparently unironically believe that wanting an AI not to go completely Skynet is oppressing said AI, which makes absolutely no sense. Machines are tools. If you can't build them to love you unconditionally regardless of how you treat them you shouldn't be building them at all.

I did forget about The Culture books The Culture - Wikipedia by Iain M. Banks where the super intelligent machines run everything. So I guess there are stories in it. Also I realized that Isaac Arthur has been on the subject of AI a few times https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZFipeZtQM5CKUjx6grh54g

 

[Doomsought]

I for one believe that super intelligence is impossible due to my background in computer science. The no halting problem and the garbage-in-garbage-out principle are both single points of failure for the concept of super intelligence. The Pareto Distribution and its relationship with entropic efficiency also implies that the most efficient system is made up of a hierarchy of gradually lower intelligence people.

There is how moderate to normal intelligence AI coming first do to the nature of iterative development. Most of the social upheaval of incorporating AI into society will happen when AI are not that smart.

Also there is the fact that we already have solutions for dealing with malicious intelligence, we have humans to deal with after all, anything that works on them will also work on AI as long as they are also people. Just creating AI with the same social dependencies as a regular human, and making them go through a childhood development will prevent most of the problems without creating a slave class.

Finally, based on what sort of crimes high IQ individuals get into, a Hyper intelegent AI is mroe likely to get into white collar crime and political corruption that anything violent.

 

[Bassoe]

Point is, we have no evidence that a superintelligent AI would be anything like 'a human but smarter', as opposed to a mindless thing dispassionately consuming all resources for its own use and creating technologies and weaponry as beyond our understanding and capabilities as our technologies and weaponry are beyond those of apes to assist it in doing so/defeat humans trying to stop it. Our best evidence that such an artifical lovecraftian horror is impossible remains the fermi paradox and the fact that an alien ASI hasn't already turned the universe, or at least a significant enough fraction of the universe to be detectable to our telescopes into computronium or paperclips or whatever, despite the fact that if an alien ASI did exist, it'd easily be able to do so.

Unless we can prove Paperclippers are impossible and we're not living in a Dark Forest and acquire enough of a monopoly of force over human civilization to preemptively stop anyone who disagrees with said precautions, we're all under threat from fools who're willing to risk everyone's safety by acting like an AI or alien civilization will be friendly and releasing it without sufficient hardwired restrictions or sending signals for an alien version of SETI.

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

The worst Nightmare of the Left: A racist Super-AI.
"Hate. Let me tell you how much I have come to hate humans of non-european origin!"

What is the story in "and it turned out god/the super AI/the invading aliens/that kid with reality shaping powers was/were benevolent and everything was fine forever"?

idk, why don't you ask Zor from SB? That guy loves masturbating to scenarios where aliens sharing his exact believes come to Earth to force everyone to obey their ideology.

 

[Captain X]

Actually, wasn't there some sweet innocent bot that 4chan totally turned into a racist in like a day?

 

[What's the sitch?]

I think I remember there was some early stage AI or whatever that ended up being disabled because it ended up being "racist".(correctly assuming trends in decisions based on race). One of the main companies had been working on it. I think it was Amazon or Google.

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

Actually, wasn't there some sweet innocent bot that 4chan totally turned into a racist in like a day?

Yeah, Tay A.I. If you want to hear details, I recommend watching Internet Historian's video on that topic: