In this model, if someone or something could “commandeer” the Intelligence sector, their power over society would be much more limited than it might appear at first. The world does not change that much at first, because the necessary complements are lacking.
In the model, intelligence and Polanyi knowledge combine to produce output. Substitutability is fairly limited. For instance, if you have problems of norms in your office, a mere dose of AI-drenched technocratic knowledge does not usually solve those problems. Sometimes it even can make those problems worse, by empowering rent-seekers further. Intelligence and Polanyi knowledge are not quite Leontief complements, but they are mostly complements.
One of my favorite lecture series he has given is The Evidence for Modern Physics where he breaks down the experiments that validate some of the weird laws of physics we have, and what it would take to validate even the weirder ones.
AI today it's just starting to to become aware of you know the existence of of of language services and agents today like to use grep and awk and whatever you know to to find all the places where you reference a certain thing but it's not semantic search, right?
Agentic and sync are natural complements because local-first is multiplayer by default, and agents are another sort of "player" in addition to human collaborators.
The success of LLMs can thus be seen as vindicating semantic inferentialism against earlier, symbolic approaches to AI that tried and failed to explicate the rules of ordinary language using formal logic.
about this idea that really when you’re older in most societies, your job is no longer to form new episodic memories, it’s to pass on the memories that you already have, this knowledge about the world, what we call semantic memory, to pass on that semantic memory to the younger generations, pass on the culture.
So it gives us this enormous amount of flexibility to stop on a dime and change, without having to erase everything we’ve already learned. And that solution is incredibly powerful, because it gives you the ability to learn from so much less information, really, and it gives you that flexibility. So one of the things I think that makes humans great is having both episodic and semantic memory.
A korrent is a belief a person has stated in their own words: one
sentence stating the claim, backed by a quote and a source, kept at
korrents.com.
Under a name here, the quoted block is what they actually said.
The korrent beneath it is the claim those words support, in
korrents' wording — tap it to see the record, its source, and who
else holds it.
Nobody here wrote their own korrents. They are compiled from public
statements, and a person can change their mind, which is recorded too.
About the English under a post
Some people here publish in a language other than English. Where they
do, this site shows a machine translation beneath the post, in
this typeface — the site's own, not theirs.
The post itself is never changed, moved or hidden: what is set in the
serif above is exactly what the person published, and it is what to
quote them on. A translation can be wrong in ways that matter,
especially about tone.
Only the post's own words are translated. A quoted post, a linked
article and a belief on korrents.com
are left in their original language.