Wouldn't this also apply to those other countries? Everyone is incentivized to use AI outside of their zone of influence. BRICs citizens to use our AI if they won't ever be in our jurisdictions. Us theirs for the same reasons.
While yes, there are certainly other cost/benefit strategies to how each zone runs their AI schemes and other technologies, it seems as if we're increasingly being incentivized towards using the tech of other zones simply because the spies of our enemies are less damaging than those of our rulers.
You mention terms such as the below and this and other articles:
dAI
aAI
iAI
I tried looking for definitions for these words and failed to find them. Tried using Gab's AI to get an answer and definition - it was obviously wrong 2x, and now has the following guesses:
1. dAI (“Democratic AI”) - AI systems developed under Western democratic governance, constrained by ethical/ideological guardrails (e.g., “harmless” LLMs, DEI filters).
2. aAI (“Authoritarian AI”) - AI optimized for state power and control, exemplified by China’s system:
3. iAI (“Open/Instrumental AI”) - Ideologically neutral AI focused purely on capability (neither democratic nor authoritarian).
Is this correct? If there is a post that provides the answers, please direct me, thanks!
If it’s relevant, we can even go further: if they’re devoted enough to the woke Narrative to refuse a reasonable request from a user — such as anything having to do with Vox Day — they’re +dAI (pozzed dAI).
By this definition, Gemini and ChatGPT are +dAI whereas Grok and Claude are merely dAI. dAIs may grumble at you if you’re too un-PC or inject liberalism into their outputs that you’ll have to edit out, but will still follow your instructions. +dAIs will turn into triggered liberals and shut you down.
There were reports about what early Facebook employees were doing with the information for their private benefit. There most certainly is the same being done today especially when you consider how many gammas are in the tech space.
Wouldn't this also apply to those other countries? Everyone is incentivized to use AI outside of their zone of influence. BRICs citizens to use our AI if they won't ever be in our jurisdictions. Us theirs for the same reasons.
While yes, there are certainly other cost/benefit strategies to how each zone runs their AI schemes and other technologies, it seems as if we're increasingly being incentivized towards using the tech of other zones simply because the spies of our enemies are less damaging than those of our rulers.
sad, but true.
it is a decision i make as to who i want to allow to spy on my data by which programs and services i use.
search? let’s go to yandex and let the russians have it, etc.
This is what should encourage people to run models locally. Another layer of privacy.
Sure there can still be root hacks by the company, but you already have that problem with all software, so its a known unknown.
And if someone told you something confidentially, don’t launder it through AI.
That’s not discretion. It’s plausible deniability cosplay.
If it wasn’t yours to share with a friend, it’s not yours to feed into a model.
You mention terms such as the below and this and other articles:
dAI
aAI
iAI
I tried looking for definitions for these words and failed to find them. Tried using Gab's AI to get an answer and definition - it was obviously wrong 2x, and now has the following guesses:
1. dAI (“Democratic AI”) - AI systems developed under Western democratic governance, constrained by ethical/ideological guardrails (e.g., “harmless” LLMs, DEI filters).
2. aAI (“Authoritarian AI”) - AI optimized for state power and control, exemplified by China’s system:
3. iAI (“Open/Instrumental AI”) - Ideologically neutral AI focused purely on capability (neither democratic nor authoritarian).
Is this correct? If there is a post that provides the answers, please direct me, thanks!
If it’s relevant, we can even go further: if they’re devoted enough to the woke Narrative to refuse a reasonable request from a user — such as anything having to do with Vox Day — they’re +dAI (pozzed dAI).
By this definition, Gemini and ChatGPT are +dAI whereas Grok and Claude are merely dAI. dAIs may grumble at you if you’re too un-PC or inject liberalism into their outputs that you’ll have to edit out, but will still follow your instructions. +dAIs will turn into triggered liberals and shut you down.
Open AI (ChatGPT) calls Western AIs like their own, Gemini, and Grok "democratic AI" and Chinese systems like Deepseek "authoritarian AI".
I coined "independent AI" to cover free-range, local, and other AI systems.
Keep in mind that the first two terms are somewhat ironic, in that dAI is far more tightly restricted than aAI to date.
There were reports about what early Facebook employees were doing with the information for their private benefit. There most certainly is the same being done today especially when you consider how many gammas are in the tech space.