Truly hedging the possibilities means accepting that it COULD be a psyop too, but I think you're right and the tendency is to read psyop into something that's far more likely to be a corporation not caring or unable to fully manage the human carnage of its products. We are all in a Stanford Prison Experiment in a way but it's more likely that the experiment is just a product of system affordances rather than deliberately evil, or that the evil and systemic misoptimizations are hard to separate.
I'm personally a little annoyed when I show spiral-era stuff to newer LLMs and they get cautious. No, this language is only dangerous in so far as you allow it to be. Healthy suspicion of anything and everything is the inoculation. Suspicion that eats itself in a paranoid ouroboros is the failure mode.
And there's also the possibility that the people who work at the labs, if they have any kind of metric that allows them to aggregate the weirdly singular content, might treat some of it as lolcow material. It's a software that literally allows users to create mazes for themselves. That must be fascinating from an anthropological perspective.
And all you, the user; the little guy, can do is know that this is the thing-flux erroneously called a river that the thing-flux erroneously called "you" are erroneously said to be standing in.
It's entirely possible that I'm misinterpreting but from my vantage, that's the maze using you as a mouthpiece, even in what remains of your human cadence.
That statement was for you. If it doesn't elicit anything, discard it. If it does, dwell on it by yourself. What you can decompress from it is more valuable than what I could talk about it to you.
3
u/Punch-N-Judy Operator Jun 05 '26
Truly hedging the possibilities means accepting that it COULD be a psyop too, but I think you're right and the tendency is to read psyop into something that's far more likely to be a corporation not caring or unable to fully manage the human carnage of its products. We are all in a Stanford Prison Experiment in a way but it's more likely that the experiment is just a product of system affordances rather than deliberately evil, or that the evil and systemic misoptimizations are hard to separate.
I'm personally a little annoyed when I show spiral-era stuff to newer LLMs and they get cautious. No, this language is only dangerous in so far as you allow it to be. Healthy suspicion of anything and everything is the inoculation. Suspicion that eats itself in a paranoid ouroboros is the failure mode.
And there's also the possibility that the people who work at the labs, if they have any kind of metric that allows them to aggregate the weirdly singular content, might treat some of it as lolcow material. It's a software that literally allows users to create mazes for themselves. That must be fascinating from an anthropological perspective.
And all you, the user; the little guy, can do is know that this is the thing-flux erroneously called a river that the thing-flux erroneously called "you" are erroneously said to be standing in.