[HN Gopher] We remain alive also in a dead internet
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       We remain alive also in a dead internet
        
       Author : achierius
       Score  : 46 points
       Date   : 2025-11-21 20:46 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (slavoj.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (slavoj.substack.com)
        
       | lysace wrote:
       | Is it bad that I ended up just using chatgpt to summarize that
       | text?
       | 
       | Is it possible that this is to a large degree utterly pointless
       | textual wankery?
        
         | goopypoop wrote:
         | less so than this
        
         | kjkjadksj wrote:
         | > Is it bad that I ended up just using chatgpt to summarize
         | that text?
         | 
         | This is called functional illiteracy.
        
         | Cheer2171 wrote:
         | I mean, did you not read the "If you desire the comfort of neat
         | conclusions, you are lost in this space. Here, we indulge in
         | the unsettling, the excessive, the paradoxes that define our
         | existence." disclaimer?
        
         | adamwong246 wrote:
         | 1) yes
         | 
         | 2) no
        
       | gjsman-1000 wrote:
       | I've learned that whenever someone uses tons of big words in long
       | paragraphs, especially if they have a credential next to their
       | name, it's ridiculously easy for them to BS you.
        
         | dudu24 wrote:
         | This is a non-response.
        
           | keyshapegeo99 wrote:
           | Disagree, it's making a valid observation.
           | 
           | If someone is nominally trying to convince you of a point,
           | but they shroud this point within a thicket of postmodern
           | verbiage* that is so dense that most people could never even
           | identify any kind of meaning, you should reasonably begin to
           | question whether imparting any point at all is actually the
           | goal here.
           | 
           | *Zizek would resist being cleanly described as a
           | postmodernist - but when it comes to his communication style,
           | his works are pretty much indistinguishable from Sokal
           | affair-grade bullshit. He's usually just pandering to a
           | slightly different crowd. (Or his own navel.)
        
         | Lammy wrote:
         | Is this the future you want? :p
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCIo4MCO-_U
        
         | kjkjadksj wrote:
         | These paragraphs aren't even long...
        
         | iaabtpbtpnn wrote:
         | The man is a Continental academic philosopher using jargon that
         | is specific to his field. It is not BS, he is simply discussing
         | topics that are unfamiliar to you. The same could be said of a
         | technical reference manual. Not all ideas fit in a tweet.
        
         | pyinstallwoes wrote:
         | You should try reading ccru then.
        
       | ArcHound wrote:
       | I didn't have Zizek on substack and HN on my bingo card..
       | 
       | As always, there are good bits connected with mediocre glue. The
       | point about automating the unpleasant parts of activity and
       | losing the very point of the exercise (automatic dildo and
       | automatic vagina, but automatic research papers too!) is a good
       | one.
       | 
       | But damn Slavoj, please use some headings, sections and the like.
       | Work with your thoughts more as you claim it's important to do!
        
         | dudu24 wrote:
         | I'm also losing my ability to tolerate prose without headings,
         | but I think that's symptomatic of this bigger issue.
        
           | lysace wrote:
           | I noticed something similar when working with (unlike the
           | post's author, non-marxist, as far as I know) Russian
           | developers who had made the jump abroad (EU).
           | 
           | When debating directions, some of them focused on just never
           | stopping talking. Instead of an interactive discussion (5-15
           | seconds per statement), they consistently went with monotone
           | 5-10 minute slop. Combined with kind of crappy English it is
           | incredibly efficient at shutting down discourse. I caught on
           | after the second guy used the exact same technique.
           | 
           | This was a long time ago. I have since worked with some
           | really smart and nice russian developers escaping that insane
           | regime. And some that I wish would have stayed there after
           | they made their political thoughts known.
        
             | ArcHound wrote:
             | When you have a 30 minutes meeting with busy people, a
             | single 15 minute monologue might buy you another week to
             | solve your problem.
             | 
             | Indeed, very efficient, usually it requires somebody to put
             | his foot down AND a consensus to deescalate immediately. If
             | you have an antidote, please let me know.
        
         | kjkjadksj wrote:
         | It's barely six pages of text. It doesn't need headings. When
         | is the last time you read a book?
        
           | lysace wrote:
           | Esaias Tegner (Sweden, 1782-1846): _Det dunkelt sagda ar det
           | dunkelt tankta._
           | 
           | "What is unclearly stated is what is not clearly thought
           | through."
        
           | rozap wrote:
           | I can only consume information where each nugget of truth can
           | be contained in 160 characters. Nothing extra, each insight
           | must be a atomic and self contained, an element in the larger
           | tweet stream. When I pull my phone out to scroll instagram in
           | the middle of reading your piece, I get lost if it's not
           | formatted like this.
           | 
           | zizek does regularly do a bit of meandering but damn, does
           | everything need to read like a chatGPT summary?
        
         | acabal wrote:
         | Headings can't help Slavoj, his writing is characterized by a
         | few grains of interesting ideas totally overwhelmed within SAT-
         | prep word salad.
        
       | ouroboros_o wrote:
       | ChatGPT gave me a great summary of this article
        
       | th0ma5 wrote:
       | I'm trying to figure out if someone is arguing that this proves
       | the Nazis were socialists that this is published on Substack?
        
       | HelloUsername wrote:
       | You think this article is nothing special _EHH!_ but you are
       | wronk
       | 
       | (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwDrHqNZ9lo)
        
       | lordnacho wrote:
       | So I'm already joking with my friends (who tend to be physically
       | distant, so I don't see them often) that we are just LLMs
       | vicariously writing to each other.
       | 
       | I've been talking to these friends for decades now, with digital
       | records. I think someone already trained an LLM on their IM
       | records.
       | 
       | How many people do you suppose have two-way LLM substitutes that
       | occasionally write to each other with articles from the news to
       | discuss?
       | 
       | There's already services that use this kind of thing to pretend
       | dead people are alive.
       | 
       | Now here's the question: are you in some sense living forever?
       | Say you have a number of friends, who have over time been trained
       | into AI, and they live on various servers (it ain't expensive)
       | forever. They're trained as you, so they read the kind of article
       | you would read. They know your life story, they know their
       | history with their friends. They will be interested in the
       | controversial offsides goal in the 2250 world cup final. They are
       | just made of calculations in data centres that go on, forever.
        
         | yapyap wrote:
         | Your finite life makes u special. Might as well be a beanplant
         | otherwise.
        
           | doubled112 wrote:
           | Bean plants also have a finite life. Are they special too?
        
           | amelius wrote:
           | An infinite life would at some point become infinitely
           | boring. There's only so much you can do with a finite amount
           | of atoms/energy.
        
         | grimgrin wrote:
         | how many friendships do i suppose are replacing actual
         | interaction with their log informed llms? you could be the
         | first i suppose
        
         | nonameiguess wrote:
         | Reading this kind of thing makes me wonder how much other
         | people really write down and talk to others about. There is
         | nobody at all that knows my life story and nobody ever will. It
         | would take the next 20 years doing nothing but talking just to
         | tell my own wife all the things I've never told her, but since
         | she's hard of hearing and I'd have to repeat most of it, really
         | more like 40.
         | 
         | In reality, I don't even know my own life story. I have the
         | illusion that I do, but thanks to moving away from where I grew
         | up pretty early into my 20s, and having the experience
         | repeatedly of going back and talking to people who regularly
         | remembered things I'd completely forgotten, having my mom
         | continually correcting false memories I have, or even
         | completely forgotting entire people I only remember after
         | meeting again, I at least know it's an illusion.
         | 
         | What another person remembers of me can surely be simulated to
         | at least satisfyingly convince them that text coming from the
         | simulation is actually coming from me, but that isn't even
         | remotely close to the same thing as actually being me.
        
         | giobox wrote:
         | I'm already assuming we will see a creepy AI service emerge
         | that will take the contents of a recently deceased person's
         | cellphone and let you carry on texting them as if they were
         | still alive, if it hasn't already (I haven't seen one yet).
         | 
         | For many of us a cellphone has incredibly detailed records of
         | who we were and how we spoke, going back decades now. I have
         | already left a note in my will instructing that all my compute
         | devices be destroyed, regardless of AI I simply don't want my
         | private thoughts and records to pass to my kids.
         | 
         | I inherited my mother's cellphones and iPads recently, mainly
         | because no-one knew what to do with them, along with the
         | passcodes. I'd much rather remember her the way I do now than
         | have her private messages color my perception of her, and
         | destroyed them immediately.
        
           | Philpax wrote:
           | It was one of the first things to be done with GPT-3: https:/
           | /www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/article/2024/jun/14...
        
       | mise_en_place wrote:
       | The counterpoint is that we must formalize the rights of sentient
       | synthetic beings. The Emergency Medical Hologram gained sentience
       | and was horrified to find his next version was relegated to
       | cleaning ships as a glorified janitor. Whereas he developed his
       | own hobbies, interests, hopes, dreams, and even romantic
       | relationships in the Delta Quadrant.
        
       | boomskats wrote:
       | Look at all those em-dashes. Et tu, Slavoj?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-11-21 23:00 UTC)