Diary

I had expected to write about Empire of AI by now, but have decided not to say much. The reason is that it is extremely detailed in a journalistic sense, but lacks the kind of perspicacity that I appreciate. Karen Hao has been covering the AI industry for years and has met many of the players, but, by the time you get to the hundredth person or the two-hundredth meeting, it becomes a blur. I just prefer analysis to journalism as it is practiced now. Overall, the impression I have is that we are living in a feudal system with warlords and vassals. The field is dominated by highly competitive males and somewhat clueless tech nerds. It's clearly about money and domination, and thoughts about the future of mankind seem to be relegated to academics, who are generally marginalized. This seems to be a continuation of the pattern in which people like Mark Zuckerberg attempt to win at all costs, and, in the process, the quality of life for millions of people declines as a result of new products such as social media. I think that social media has had a net negative effect on society. Besides reducing the quality of personal interactions, it has opened the floodgates to unscrupulous "influencers" who, in different times, would rightly be ignored. In any case, from reading this book, I'm not sure how the AI story is going to end, but the trajectory doesn't look good at the moment. There is a significant likelihood that this will be one of the most transformative periods in history, comparable to the development of agriculture or the Industrial Revolution. But it could also turn out quite negatively if power isn't distributed appropriately. Judging from current geopolitics, it could be disastrous. However, the EU has been uniting recently and, if the MAGA movement in the U.S. collapses, as seems increasingly possible, the Western world, at least, may begin to behave rationally again.

I think that the hot weather here is abating for the year, and I'll be spending more time outdoors. I just returned from the Cadwell Trail, and it is once again suitable for dainty women such as Emily Dickinson. It appears to me that most women, not including tomboys, dislike the outdoors but won't admit it. Spending a lot of time outdoors, especially under adverse conditions, is similar to roughhousing – not a female favorite. My new telescope mount seems to be working properly, but I need a few clear nights to work on the alignment. By pinpointing known objects, the computer improves its finding and tracking accuracy. Although I like the Losmandy company, I would prefer a detailed manual to a bunch of videos and podcasts. This is another result of the social media craze that I find to be time-wasting. When I am working on technical problems, I don't see the point of turning them into social experiences. Social media has created the myth that all interactions must have a social element – even when that serves no purpose. One of the effects of this phenomenon, I think, has been a decrease in literacy. Many videos or podcasts could be summed up in a few sentences. Also, it is usually easier to look up information in a book rather than scour videos and podcasts. However, on a positive note, I am finding Google searches with AI highly productive. If you word your query carefully, you can save an enormous amount of time and get better answers. Unless Wikipedia changes its operating model, it will probably become obsolete. I wouldn't miss it.

So, I don't currently have anything lined up to read and will begin looking again. I'm also running out of films to watch. I've started on "Splendor in the Grass," with Warren Beatty and Natalie Wood. Warren Beatty is not a great actor, and he used to be a "hunk." Barbara Streisand said recently that she slept with him once, but that she couldn't remember whether they had sex. Many women slept with him. I much prefer Natalie Wood, who was a good actress. But the film is sort of formulaic and dated (1961).