4 ms·

"I think we will one day come to see access to open weight models as an inalienable right to defense against tyranny." I don't think this kind of rhetoric about

by TFNA 2mo ago

"I think we will one day come to see access to open weight models as an inalienable right to defense against tyranny." I don't think this kind of rhetoric about individual civil liberties is realistic any more when the next centuries belong to China, and even countries with a liberal democratic tradition are converging towards the Chinese model.

soulofmischief 2mo ago
The thing about inalienable rights is that they are not rhetoric, they are an intrinsic recognition of rights that do not require the recognition of authority: Governments which do not respect these human rights should not be modified; not the other way around. China is an authoritarian government and its policies have no more bearing on what people settle for than the currently socially unacceptable regime in the US. In my opinion, if one lacks the motivation or resolve to fight for these rights, they should do so quietly and not attempt to patronize others who still stand by these rights as not being "realistic".
derektank 2mo ago
>even countries with a liberal democratic tradition are converging towards the Chinese model What specific examples of this do you have in mind? I can’t think of any liberal democratic countries converging on a combination of (a) single party rule, (b) nearly universal intrusion of state or party actors into private sector entities, (c) financial repression of private investments, and (d) the associated suppression of domestic consumption.
- TFNA 2mo ago
  I meant more generally: many countries are recognizing, just like China has, that the fundamental challenge of our modern era is ensuring social harmony. The OP's belief in individual civil liberties as a good in themselves is anachronistic now.
somenameforme 2mo ago
The reason the China model is working in China is because their economy is booming. As soon as it slows down, which it will, they're going to be in for chaos. This is also very historically precedented, where China has always gone through dynastic cycles of flourish, stagnate, decline, chaos, reset. China isn't doing well because of their model, they're doing well because of their economy. Their success is in spite of their governmental model, except in as much as having a dictatorship that can, for example, meaningfully deter corporate malfeasance, or do other such things that can help contribute to their economic growth. That part other countries could certainly take a thing or two from - instead, they just seem to want the censorship and surveillance.
- TFNA 2mo ago
  Disagree. I think with modern tech China has built a surveillance panopticon that will continue to ensure social harmony through any economic downturn, and this is precisely the model that is appealing to so many other countries now.
  - detourdog 2mo ago
    Also scarcity isn’t what it once was. The biggest internal social problems were often scarcity induced.
  - somenameforme 2mo ago
    Mass surveillance is nothing new. The USSR had an absurdly wide surveillance net paired with endless on-the-ground informants making people terrified to speak pretty much anywhere, yet as soon as things started slowing down the entire system collapsed with a shocking rapidity, because these things don't create social harmony, they create a dystopic nightmare that people want to overthrow. However, people are willing to tolerate dystopia when real wages are skyrocketing, your nation is doing wild things (like radically advancing human spaceflight), and more. But as soon as all of this slows down you're left with the same uninspiring directionless stagnation that plagues all nations eventually, and a dystopic social system on top.
    - 2mo ago

by TFNA 2mo ago

soulofmischief 2mo ago

The thing about inalienable rights is that they are not rhetoric, they are an intrinsic recognition of rights that do not require the recognition of authority: Governments which do not respect these human rights should not be modified; not the other way around. China is an authoritarian government and its policies have no more bearing on what people settle for than the currently socially unacceptable regime in the US. In my opinion, if one lacks the motivation or resolve to fight for these rights, they should do so quietly and not attempt to patronize others who still stand by these rights as not being "realistic".

derektank 2mo ago

>even countries with a liberal democratic tradition are converging towards the Chinese model What specific examples of this do you have in mind? I can’t think of any liberal democratic countries converging on a combination of (a) single party rule, (b) nearly universal intrusion of state or party actors into private sector entities, (c) financial repression of private investments, and (d) the associated suppression of domestic consumption.

TFNA 2mo ago
I meant more generally: many countries are recognizing, just like China has, that the fundamental challenge of our modern era is ensuring social harmony. The OP's belief in individual civil liberties as a good in themselves is anachronistic now.

somenameforme 2mo ago

The reason the China model is working in China is because their economy is booming. As soon as it slows down, which it will, they're going to be in for chaos. This is also very historically precedented, where China has always gone through dynastic cycles of flourish, stagnate, decline, chaos, reset. China isn't doing well because of their model, they're doing well because of their economy. Their success is in spite of their governmental model, except in as much as having a dictatorship that can, for example, meaningfully deter corporate malfeasance, or do other such things that can help contribute to their economic growth. That part other countries could certainly take a thing or two from - instead, they just seem to want the censorship and surveillance.

TFNA 2mo ago
Disagree. I think with modern tech China has built a surveillance panopticon that will continue to ensure social harmony through any economic downturn, and this is precisely the model that is appealing to so many other countries now.
- detourdog 2mo ago
  Also scarcity isn’t what it once was. The biggest internal social problems were often scarcity induced.
- somenameforme 2mo ago
  Mass surveillance is nothing new. The USSR had an absurdly wide surveillance net paired with endless on-the-ground informants making people terrified to speak pretty much anywhere, yet as soon as things started slowing down the entire system collapsed with a shocking rapidity, because these things don't create social harmony, they create a dystopic nightmare that people want to overthrow. However, people are willing to tolerate dystopia when real wages are skyrocketing, your nation is doing wild things (like radically advancing human spaceflight), and more. But as soon as all of this slows down you're left with the same uninspiring directionless stagnation that plagues all nations eventually, and a dystopic social system on top.
  - 2mo ago