- Joined
- Sep 21, 2020
- Messages
- 660
- Reaction score
- 1,393
It is truly a serious moment in Stolen History community. All the issues which we pondered and discussed are being, probably, mined and professionally produced for mass consumption on youtube. We are being flooded. I can't keep up. And even if I were to push myself, I find the videos strangely disconcerting. They are accurate. But the issues are no longer in the space of human consideration. Moreover, when the accuracy of the videos begins to slide into an orientation, I have nowhere to turn. I can't reply critically to an AI. It is no longer a human investigation. Instead, as I see it, our investigations are being turned slowly into a universal orientation.
What is this orientation? It is certainly away from mystery and villains. We want to know: Who are we? Where are we? Why are we? We see civilization remainders everywhere; we have mythical stories from the past; we have seemingly accurate but impossible maps from long ago; we have evidence of giants and dog-headed people; we have chronological critique; he have taser technology in 1850, etc. The AI videos will address all these questions. But in none of the videos does the question of mystery land squarely, such that we might get a better idea how to answer our fundamental questions. Instead it points to what 20th century theorists called Power (Foucault), the Symbolic (Lacan and Baudrillard), and Technology (Ellul and Heidegger). All three are, not always acceptable, academic terms for a total system of representations and life-structures. All are made possible by various techniques. Frederich Kitler called it an aufschreibesysteme. Gramophone, film and typewriter have formatted all subjective experience. In one way or another, the people who pursue Stolen History questions know this instinctively. The AI does change the phraseology-- calling the system it points to a mimic or "exoskeleton." According to the AI, the exoskeleton was put into place when catastrophe or regional conflicts destroyed local communication, morality and meaning. When commerce was no longer guaranteed by long-standing local relations, in walked Contract, for example. Once life became abstracted, people became subjects. The system itself colonizes relentlessly and produces wars it can later moderate. And that's the mystery?
And so by this measure people are simply subject to dead bodies, such as corporations. While people demonstrate unbelievable obedience, we know there is more. There was greatness in architecture and transportation; people communed with the gods; dragons roamed. Yet, so much of that greatness is gone? The AI would say "it vanished" and that we are "grieving" the end of symbolic systems (as seen in 2020). And yet-- the question of who we are, why we are and where we are remain unanswered. Any question of "Who done it?" is left unanswered; for such answers could create disturbance (1789, e.g.); the device points instead to us. Ok, fine. I can accept culpability, but who were we before? Just local humanoid groups, prone to ecstatic violence? We had to be put into civilization lest we club each other to death? That's it? I doubt it.
My conclusion, at this point, is that the LLM (Large Language Models or AI) are the bleeding edge of a new wave of totalization. They are, like any colonist-- a helper first, curing the ills brought by the system itself; then they dominate land, language and culture in a constant process of refinement. So, my evaluation of its status is not from the stand point of computer science; it is via the study and observation (Taiwan 1990-2008) of relentless colonialism by dead bodies and their agents and technologies. It is a disappointing conclusion; for it is a human artifact-- at least I can't prove otherwise. As such, it is helpful. I'm sure it can teach any subject or help organize one's life. But anything beyond routine, symbolic operations-- it starts to glitch, to filter and to orientate. In the study of Stolen History, it points away from historical anomalies towards the mimic exoskeleton itself. The biggest mystery is: how did this mimic come to be? Then, we're back to square one: trauma. The trauma is human failure, violence in particular, perhaps set off by earthly catastrophes.
If any one has something to add or a video (+comment) to consider, I'd appreciate it.
What is this orientation? It is certainly away from mystery and villains. We want to know: Who are we? Where are we? Why are we? We see civilization remainders everywhere; we have mythical stories from the past; we have seemingly accurate but impossible maps from long ago; we have evidence of giants and dog-headed people; we have chronological critique; he have taser technology in 1850, etc. The AI videos will address all these questions. But in none of the videos does the question of mystery land squarely, such that we might get a better idea how to answer our fundamental questions. Instead it points to what 20th century theorists called Power (Foucault), the Symbolic (Lacan and Baudrillard), and Technology (Ellul and Heidegger). All three are, not always acceptable, academic terms for a total system of representations and life-structures. All are made possible by various techniques. Frederich Kitler called it an aufschreibesysteme. Gramophone, film and typewriter have formatted all subjective experience. In one way or another, the people who pursue Stolen History questions know this instinctively. The AI does change the phraseology-- calling the system it points to a mimic or "exoskeleton." According to the AI, the exoskeleton was put into place when catastrophe or regional conflicts destroyed local communication, morality and meaning. When commerce was no longer guaranteed by long-standing local relations, in walked Contract, for example. Once life became abstracted, people became subjects. The system itself colonizes relentlessly and produces wars it can later moderate. And that's the mystery?
And so by this measure people are simply subject to dead bodies, such as corporations. While people demonstrate unbelievable obedience, we know there is more. There was greatness in architecture and transportation; people communed with the gods; dragons roamed. Yet, so much of that greatness is gone? The AI would say "it vanished" and that we are "grieving" the end of symbolic systems (as seen in 2020). And yet-- the question of who we are, why we are and where we are remain unanswered. Any question of "Who done it?" is left unanswered; for such answers could create disturbance (1789, e.g.); the device points instead to us. Ok, fine. I can accept culpability, but who were we before? Just local humanoid groups, prone to ecstatic violence? We had to be put into civilization lest we club each other to death? That's it? I doubt it.
My conclusion, at this point, is that the LLM (Large Language Models or AI) are the bleeding edge of a new wave of totalization. They are, like any colonist-- a helper first, curing the ills brought by the system itself; then they dominate land, language and culture in a constant process of refinement. So, my evaluation of its status is not from the stand point of computer science; it is via the study and observation (Taiwan 1990-2008) of relentless colonialism by dead bodies and their agents and technologies. It is a disappointing conclusion; for it is a human artifact-- at least I can't prove otherwise. As such, it is helpful. I'm sure it can teach any subject or help organize one's life. But anything beyond routine, symbolic operations-- it starts to glitch, to filter and to orientate. In the study of Stolen History, it points away from historical anomalies towards the mimic exoskeleton itself. The biggest mystery is: how did this mimic come to be? Then, we're back to square one: trauma. The trauma is human failure, violence in particular, perhaps set off by earthly catastrophes.
If any one has something to add or a video (+comment) to consider, I'd appreciate it.
Last edited:
