Jeff Jarvis Profile picture
Jun 12 21 tweets 7 min read
This gets worse. The Post hangs its moral panic tale on a guy who is mocked by the f'ing Daily Caller as too far out there. He describes himself as a wiccan associated with the Church of the Subgenius:
amp.dailycaller.com/2019/04/23/goo…
He says he' the victim of religious discrimination & bias because he's from the South. He describes himself here as a Christian mystic. He's intelligent & well-meaning but you'd think the WaPo would have, uh, Googled him to provide context.
cajundiscordian.medium.com/religious-disc…
BTW, his boss, Blaise Aguera y Arcas -- @blaiseaguera -- is someone whose work I follow in book history: a brilliant, Princeton grad. I trust the boss. Imagine getting a call from an employee saying, in essence: The machine is *alive*! How would you react? How does the WaPo?
But the Post was just too eager for another #moralpanic story about strange things happening in these black boxes. They might as well be covering UFOs. Is this the reportorial diligence they bring to covering Donald Trump?
Good morning. Here's Lemoine's post in which he fully anthropomorphizes LaMDA and then--here's likely the real point--makes this a question of a soul and thus of faith. He's making this religious. 1/ cajundiscordian.medium.com/what-is-lamda-…
Note that he's not saying this is religious for him but for the bosses denying his contentions. In claiming that IT'S ALIVE! he's saying he's the scientist & they're--what?--heretical. Keep in mind that he says he's a priest and wiccan. It's a hall of mirrors, a game. 2/
Says Lemoine: "LaMDA may very well have a soul as it claims to and may even have the rights that it claims to have." He attributes to it motives and desires. 3/
Once again, I support an ethical discussion about such issues as whether tech is used to fool people. Fine. But that's not what the WaPo story is about. It hinges on the simple yet--as Lemoine himself concedes--undefined contention of sentience, i.e., IT'S ALIVE! 4/
The Post allowed itself to be used because it wanted a moral-panic tale about computers going too far, becoming ALIVE!, presenting untold dangers. They wanted an UH-OH! They based their entire story on one person and his contentions. That is to say the least shoddy journalism. 5/
I've been collecting examples of media's moral panic about technology--the internet, data, AI--and I'm grateful for such a juicy specimen. 6/
As for Google, Lemoine is trying to put them in a bind--his game--where the company is accused of--what?--bad personnel policies over a computer brain? slavery (he discusses that)? hell, abortion if Google turns it off? It's that ridiculous. It's a game. 7/
The unsuspecting agent here who's being fooled is not Lemoine, not LaMDA, not Google, but the Washington Post. 8/
And given the state of news today--everybody copying everybody else to get their own clicks & pageviews--the WaPo's "reporting" spreads without questioning. 9/
If you read the Washington Post story, wouldn't you also like to know this, for context? 10/
Judging whether Lemoine is serious is like judging whether LaMDA is sentient. It's a game. The Washington Post loses. 11/
In the end, judging whether Lemoine is serious is like judging whether LaMDA is sentient. That's the game. The Washington Post lost. 11/
For a far more intelligent discussion of these questions--of intelligence, language, coherence, even eloquence but not sentience--turn instead to an essay by @blaiseaguera (Lemoine's Google boss) in The Economist. 13/ economist.com/by-invitation/…
What is also at work here is the theory of mind. In this post of mine, I summarize Alex Rosenberg's puncturing of it as well as @dweinberger's discussion of why machine-learning freaks people out (spoiler: it can predict our behavior better than we do).14/
medium.com/whither-news/a…
I just ordered @blaiseaguera's new novella on AI, reviewed here: thestranger.com/slog/2022/03/0…
One more bit for the thread: biographical background on the Post's subject:

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jeff Jarvis

Jeff Jarvis Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jeffjarvis

Jun 13
Exactly as planned, look what is the most read story on the Washington Post this morning: Its clickbait works. Image
Look how the Washington Post LaMDA story spread, as things do, across "news" media. They spend huge resource just rewriting each other to get their own stories on their own pages to attract their own clicks (and SEO) for their own pageviews and their own ads.
Only some of them: ImageImageImageImage
And it spreads across the world. In French: Image
Read 4 tweets
Apr 21
"Unworthy to participate." Can't get more privileged than that. Here is the essence of media's animus toward technology. The internet lets the unworthy speak. It breaks media's monopoly on worthiness. For good & ill, it frees public conversation from the confines of "content". 🧵
This has always been the public, with its intellectually lazy, ignorant, bigoted, & backward unworthy--as well as its intelligent & caring but unrepresented minorities. They were allowed to vote, sometimes, but nothing more. They were not heard. They were exploited when need be.
In the economics of mass media the few, the white, the rich & powerful controlled the conversation, commercializing & commodifying it as copyrighted "content", a product to be sold. Media were once conversational. The industrialization of text killed the public conversation.
Read 19 tweets
Apr 20
Oh, no. Morning Joe is having on Haidt. Moral panic in the morning.
Oh, good, @esglaude is there to defend humanity.
Haidt attacks social media as an acid eating away at shared trust and stories--which is nothing but nostalgia for the hegemony of mass media before the net enabled more voices to be heard.
Read 20 tweets
Apr 11
No, Joe, these are not "issues." These are Republican tropes intended to take over the media agenda. Judging by this, it's working.
1. Conservative voices are not "censored" on social media. Social media is, at long last, under considerable media pressure from the likes of you, Joe, finally setting and enforcing standards regarding hate speech--that is, Republicans' speech. There's the real issue.
2. College campus are not becoming liberal echo chambers. They are becoming the targets of well-funded, concerted attacks by the right wing attacking the institution of education because it's the uneducated who vote for the GOP. That's the issue.
Read 8 tweets
Mar 22
I'm sad about @BuzzFeedNews. It did great work. I've long feared this for I've long said BuzzFeed News didn't have a business model. It was a generous gift to society, subsidized by BuzzFeed & Jonah Peretti, but was no magic bullet for sustainable news. 1/
cnbc.com/2022/03/22/buz…
Back in the day, the digital news cognoscenti scolded me, saying I didn't understand: BuzzFeed was the first newsroom built on data, they said. OK, but data doesn't feed reporters. 2/
BuzzFeed proper had a brilliant, innovative, net-native business model, telling advertisers: "Look how we make our stuff viral; we can make your stuff viral. Only we know how. Pay us." Instead of space, time, or people, BuzzFeed sold a *skill.* It was genius. 3/
Read 8 tweets
Mar 18
Yes. And "quality speech" does not come from stopping certain speech. It will come from finding, recommending, amplifying certain speech: that which is informed, relevant, wise: you pick the criteria! 1/
The problem with the internet-is-bad game of whack-a-mole is that platforms are judged by what they don't kill ("something must be done"). It sets the terms of the discussion about discussion around what is bad & killed to cleanse the public sphere. That is futile & dangerous. 2/
See the first page of Harper's first issue in 1850. Its mission was to help folks find the good stuff. Our institutions that did that in the age of print are inadequate in a time of abundant speech. It's not the speech that's bad. Our institutions-NYT-aren't up to the task. 3/
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(