I will conclude this portion of the thread with a key point Benjamin Bratton makes about #AI non-grief: "There are ‘non-grief’ ways of thinking through a philosophy of artificialized intelligence that are neither optimistic nor pessimistic, utopian nor dystopian."

This year's issue includes:
- Essays from @blaiseaguera.bsky.social, @kalladomcdowell.bsky.social, Benjamin Bratton, and @saraimari.bsky.social consider how to define and differentiate intelligence, computation, and identity in the face of synthetic minds.

Thats not even close to my actual argument

Here is the piece itself Shannon. I would hope you read it more carefully that that guy did

The argument not that critique doesn’t matter but that’s it’s *not working* to achieve the goal that Europe says it wants.

www.noemamag.com/is-european-...

“The Earth has very recently evolved a smart exoskeleton,” posits Benjamin Bratton in an essay about what he terms “planetary sapience.”

Wish that’s Bria did

She didn't even read my piece. She is arguing against what she presumes I must have said which apparently is that Europe should adopt American AI. Instead I am arguing that her approach is not going to lead to the goals she advocating for. Her reply is to double down on defending the goals.

I mostly am on Bluesky to remind myself why I should not spend any time on Bluesky.

too late now. ;)

seriously, write about whatever you want, including books I haven't read.

Apparently it’s very hard for Benjamin Bratton to understand that people resist tech because they *do not want the tech.* People do not embrace the tech he wants just because he once used 3,000 pages to vaguely explain what infrastructure is.