#actually angry about this

[libelitter]

TikTok hetalia fans are so new to fandom cause what do you mean "mass usuk unfollowing" "we are not bringing usuk into 2025 🙏🙏🙏🥶🥶🥶" I don't even ship usuk at all but just because you see them as brothers or father and son does not mean others do mkaayyy this is why Tumblr is better just move here and block the damn tag ohbmy god 💀

[lameotello]

It's so sad that a show as good and fun and wholesome as Rise managed to gather such a toxic community that I've genuinely seen several artists and writers stop creating for the fandom and even stopped being into the show because the constant discourse and harassement (of them or others) got to them

[gracien-system]

We are extremely far from being able to create a truly sentient AI.

The most optimistic estimates of the amount of processing power the human brain possesses are orders of magnitude off from the amount of processing power every computer on earth has, combined.

And that's not even including the tax that you incur from emulation.

The ML shit that is currently happening is nothing like a true AI. It is a collection of linear programming and statistical models which create the illusion of intelligence by recombining data in statistical fashions which make it seem like there is intent when there really isn't.

All they're doing is looking at the last thing they did and predicting the most likely next step, then doing that and repeating the process until the task is complete.

All of this is to preface an entirely different conversation/argument we've been seeing way more than we'd like, recently. That being "we will never achieve sentient AI, it's impossible".

And I would like to counter this in a few different ways, and then leave it alone, because frankly, we hate the discussions about what is/isn't possible via technology, and hate discussions about machine learning with a particular passion.

So, why do we believe sentient AI is possible at all.

Well, when we talk about AI, we aren't limiting our discussion to binary computation. Using a classical or quantum computer and trying to create a consciousness with it is a bad idea. It's theoretically not impossible -- the universe is built on a foundation of information, of bits, of yes/no questions, but frankly, you're not just trying to simulate a consciousness at that point, you're trying to simulate the things that make a consciousness, and doing that makes the computational requirements just absolutely fucking outrageous.

Even if we're talking about a quantum computer, the advantage that it has over regular computing is that you can find every possible solution to an equation in the same time it takes to get one solution, because it does them all simultaneously, and then collapses the computation into the solution you were (hopefully) looking for.

That technology isn't the technology that you're going to want to use if your goal is to create a sentient AI. Not anywhere near it. And I think that's what people get stuck on when they talk about how we will never create sentient AI -- limiting themselves to traditional and quantum computing.

There are other forms of computation which are much closer to the human brain, though -- and much closer to what you would want to use if your goal was to create an artificial intelligence.

Analogue computing comes to mind -- using physical electrical currents to do imprecise, but nearly instant calculation. However, the main thing about analogue computing is that it's... analogue. It's specific. You have a device which can do one thing, and to make it do something else, you need to take it apart and reassemble it in another configuration.

Analogue computing is not what will create AI, not on its own. I think it will be part of that solution, but it won't be the soul component.

So, you might ask what will be that soul component, what computational technology will let us create a sentient AI -- what will allow us to play god in that way?

Frankly, I'm not an oracle. I can't predict which one of the dozen different technologies being worked on as we speak will be the main component of a future AI, if any of them end up being that technology.

But I do know this:

Nature created us. Humanity. It gave us consciousness, it gave us sapience -- and it likely gave some other animals that trait, too.

And frankly? I believe that if nature did it with no guiding hand or intention, humanity can do it with intent in an order of magnitude less time.

If we were forced to make a bet on which technology creates AI first, we would bet on lab-grown neurons interfacing with electrodes. Does that count as artificial intelligence? In the strictest sense, I think it would. It's certainly artificial, and it would certainly be an intelligence. And I think that it would have the best chance of making a sentient AI in our lifetime, or shortly thereafter.

And now it's tangent time.

I know where the arguments about this kind of thing come from, and I know that if this post breaks containment we're going to have people from a dozen different communities all throwing different points at us as to why we're wrong. I'm going to address at least one or two of them here.

One of the things we've seen thrown around about this is that under capitalism, there is no profit incentive to create a sentient AI, and that if people claimed they had created one, they would likely be lying, or have some ulterior motive for why they claimed so.

That is correct! You're fucking right! There is no reason for sentient AI to be made under capitalism! That does not mean it isn't possible for it to be made under capitalism! Or in a post capitalist world!

Just because capitalism doesn't create optimal or semi-optimal conditions for something to be created doesn't mean that it won't be created anyway. Humans are curious and motivated and even in a system which actively hates technological progress which can't be monetized, it can still happen. That doesn't mean it will happen, but that also doesn't mean it can't happen.

Yes, machines and people are fundamentally different things. Creating a sentient AI is playing god. Creating a sentient AI is creating a living thing.

The morals of this are questionable. I can see the argument behind why we shouldn't try to create sentient AI. I can see the argument why we shouldn't create artificial life.

But I really hate the narrative that doing it is impossible. That it is beyond technology, or beyond human reach.

There are some science fiction concepts which are likely impossible. FTL travel and time travel, for example.

But this absolutely isn't one of them. The universe created life without intent and without a guidebook. The universe created sentience without intent, and without a guidebook.

Humanity has a blueprint, and humanity has intent.

Nature did it first. We can do it too. Should we? I don't know. But the fact that we can is important to recognize.

Alright, that's about all we've got. I hope the rant was coherent enough to be understood, and that we were persuasive. Good luck and good tidings, even if you disagree with us.

[maeamian]

If you saw me agreeing with being annoyed about wasted helium in a fictional context and were like "I bet she has some more helium based anger in her life" good news LAPD fucked up a raid on a medical facility they thought was a pot farm and flat out ruined thousands of gallons of the stuff.

[lazylittledragon]

y'know every time i feel guilty about bothering someone by singing along when i'm listening to music, i just remember that i have to tolerate my dirtbag brother screaming at his ps5 for hours every day so listening to muffled off-key fall out boy is probably preferable

[schizoaffectively]

You are well within your right to be angry about the help you didn't get and should have gotten.

You are well within your right to be angry about having your needs neglected.

You are well within your right to be angry.

[arowitharrows]

I fully support Pluto as an aro symbol (x) but as a space scientist I cannot support any arguments that claim it's because Pluto should be a planet. The true reason Pluto is an aro symbol is precisely because people tie the amount of love and care this wonderful celestial body receives to which label it has. Just because a relationship with someone is not labeled as romantic should not mean that this relationship has to be treated as less worthy of time and care and effort. Just because Pluto is not labeled as a planet does not mean it is less worthy of our time and care and effort.

Here is another reason Pluto is aro: Pluto has a heart shaped region called the Tombaugh region:

[ID: an image of Pluto and it's heart shaped Tombaugh region, with the moon Charon in the background. End ID]

Now, Pluto and it's moon Charon are tidally locked, meaning they always face each other with the same hemisphere. Pluto's heart is always facing away from Charon. Some articles have phrased this as being tragically romantic, but I disagree! Here are two celestial objects orbiting each other for billions of years, and they are doing this while Pluto keeps it's heart hidden. Because in this case, love is not part of the equation that makes up their bond, romance does not play a part in their gravitational pull towards each other. That's aro as fuck, in my humble opinion.

[inkskinned]

one of the things that's the most fucking frustrating for me about arguing with climate change deniers is the sheer fucking scope of how much it matters. sweating in my father's car, thinking about how it's the "hottest summer so far," every summer. and there's this deep, roiling rage that comes over me, every time.

the stakes are wrong, is the thing. that's part of what makes it not an actual debate: the other side isn't coming to the table with anything to fucking lose.

like okay. i am obviously pro gun control. but there is a basic human part of me that can understand and empathize with someone who says, "i'm worried that would lead to the law-abiding citizens being punished while criminals now essentially have a superpower." i don't agree, but i can tell the stakes for them are also very high.

but let's say the science is wrong and i'm wrong and the visible reality is wrong and every climate disaster refugee is wrong. let's say you're right, humans aren't causing it or it's not happening or whatever else. let's just say that, for fun.

so we spend hundreds of millions of dollars making the earth cleaner, and then it turns out we didn't need to do that. oops! we cleaned the earth. our children grow up with skies full of more butterflies and bees. lawns are taken over with rich local biodiversity. we don't cry over our electric bills anymore. and, if you're staunchly capitalist and i need to speak ROI with you - we've created so many jobs in developing sectors and we have exciting new investment opportunities.

i am reminded of kodak, and how they did not make "the switch" to digital photography; how within 20 years kodak was no longer a household brand. do we, as a nation, feel comfortable watching as the world makes "the switch" while we ride the laurels of oil? this boggles me. i have heard so much propaganda about how america cannot "fall behind" other countries, but in this crucial sector - the one that could actually influence our own monopolies - suddenly we turn the other cheek. but maybe you're right! maybe it will collapse like just another silicone valley dream. but isn't that the crux of capitalism? that some economies will peter out eventually?

but let's say you're right, and i'm wrong, and we stopped fracking for no good reason. that they re-seed quarries. that we tear down unused corporate-owned buildings or at least repurpose them for communities. that we make an effort, and that effort doesn't really help. what happens then? what are the stakes. what have we lost, and what have we gained?

sometimes we take our cars through a car wash and then later, it rains. "oh," we laugh to ourselves. we gripe about it over coffee with our coworkers. what a shame! but we are also aware: the car is cleaner. is that what you are worried about? that you'll make the effort but things will resolve naturally? that it will just be "a waste"?

and what i'm right. what if we're already seeing people lose their houses and their lives. what if it is happening everywhere, not just in coastal towns or equatorial countries you don't care about. what if i'm right and you're wrong but you're yelling and rich and powerful. so we ignore all of the bellwethers and all of the indicators and all of the sirens. what if we say - well, if it happens, it's fate.

nevermind. you wouldn't even wear a mask, anyway. i know what happens when you see disaster. you think the disaster will flinch if you just shout louder. that you can toss enough lives into the storm for the storm to recognize your sacrifice and balk. you argue because it feels good to stand up against "the liberals" even when the situation should not be political. you are busy crying for jesus with a bullhorn while i am trying to usher people into a shelter. you've already locked the doors, even on the church.

the stakes are skewed. you think this is some intellectual "debate" to win, some funny banter. you fuel up your huge unmuddied truck and say suck it to every citizen of that shitbird state california. serves them right for voting blue!

and the rest of us are terrified of the entire fucking environment collapsing.

[midnight-soulless-system]

Sometimes being disabled means you can't go to college, can't get a job, have to live with your parents and that's ok. For a lot of us it means not being able to go outside most days, not being able to get up or move at all. It can mean needing someone to wash us or feed us or help us with the bathroom and that is ok. It doesn't mean that we're less than or that we aren't worth anything.

And it's valid for us to be mad about it. Even if we can overcome some of these things with accomodations we're allowed to be mad that we're in this situation, and wish that we weren't disabled because I sure as hell hate this shit.

[arcticclimes]

Something something Fitzjames and Hodgson are two of the most dandy-ish characters in The Terror but they're also two of the most dangerous; they've both been to war, both do the greatest damage to Tuunbaq using the weaponry they were trained in by the navy (Hodgson with the cannon and Fitzjames with the congreves), and Hodgson is also the one to kill the Inuit family, directly connecting the violence of imperialism with the gentlemanly facade it likes to use.

[ruubesz-draws]

He always looks angry

But he's actually a real big softie (only for Mothra tho)

(The angle is very important)

[kaleidoscopiccc]

oh you hate musicals? oh so youre allergic to all fun and whimsy then? youre against all joy and giddiness brought in front of you huh? you just hate any and all happiness and silly times dont you?

[radiance1]

The Ghost Prince does not, under any circumstances, answer a summoning after it was made aware he existed. None know why he doesn't, some are bitter and hateful of it while others are thankful that it's one less bloodthirsty manic to deal with.

The Ghost King meanwhile hasn't been seen in multiple eons, so the magical community who wanted to use his power just, stopped, trying to summon him for a long time.

Most magic users knew that the Ghost Prince never answered a summons, and that the Ghost King just dropped off the radar.

So could you really blame Constantine for not taking it that seriously when some wannabe hotshot cultists try to summon both of them in the middle of a city to wreak havoc?

He'll give them some credit though. Points for doing it in broad daylight and actually being somewhat of a threat with not relying on just summoning the Ghost royalty and figuring out what to do from there.

The area they were in was somewhat destroyed, then the cultists manage to complete the summoning circle to summon both of them and Constantine, well he just light up a smoke.

It isn't going to work anyways so what does it matter?

...

Is that a fucking Ice cream truck he hears? Who the fuck is driving an Ice cream truck while their city is being under attacked with cultists trying to summon eldritch ghost royalty?

He'll give them some points for dedication, though.

Then he looked at the cultists and nearly had a goddamn heart attack to see that the summoning circle is actually fucking lighting up and working.

The Bat is so gonna give him a headache over this.

----

Danny Phantom, crown prince of the Infinite Realms. Does not answer summons.

For one, it is annoying as shit, whenever someone interrupts his day just to ask for infinite power (that he can't give), world domination (that he won't do) or infinite riches (which he also can't do).

It just got annoying being summoned all the time so. One day he just, well, no. And hey, it worked out well enough for him to not continue doing it.

Then he also learned that Pariah Dark is basically the same, after he got out the coffin and stopped trying to take over the world for whatever reason. He was actually a pretty swell guy!

He was just with him too, with him being not so swell at the time for making him go through lessons about Ghost etiquette, rules, stuff that's expected of him as the crown prince.

And don't even get him started on the engagement and marriage proposals.

Overall, he just wanted to find an excuse to leave. Then he felt the familiar suggestive pull of a summoning and, instead of rejection as he usually does in a second. He thought for a bit if he wanted to go with that or crown prince duties.

It was tempting, but dealing with cultists seemed worse than this so he was about to reject.

At least, before he heard an Ice cream truck playing in the background. He doesn't even know how the hell that popped up through the pull but by the gods has it been a while since he's had Ice cream.

So he answers and is gone with a pop.

Pariah Dark just stares for a good second or two, before breathing out and deciding to also answer. Fright Knight is just there, off to side, questioning what he should do now.

Danny wastes no time with the cultists on the other side and in fact, he pushes them out of the way and goes diving for that Ice cream truck he hears. Only to realize he doesn't, have any money on him.

Fuck.

Pariah Dark is less inclined to follow the rules imposed by humans like money, but he does know it can be important. Once in a while. Not that often, but it has its times.

So when he sees his adopted son being sad over being unable to pay for some kind of human delicacy, he digs around in his hair (yes, his hair.) and pulls out some money and puts it on the counter as payment.

The man inside the tiny vehicle had shrieked before getting what they wanted. Which is good. Fear is a good motivator, Pariah thinks.

Unknown to him, it wasn't out of fear (Well, mostly) but because the Ghost King placed down a coin made of pure, solid gold on his counter.

The two then go about their business in the human realm, completely forgetting about the fact that they were summoned here for something.

Constantine is both relieved and about to have an aneurysm at seeing Infinite Realm royalty only answering a summon because of Ice cream.

[rosekasa]

im feeling so unwell about them tonight

[luolii]

thinking about meg apollo parallels and the cycle of abuse again arghhh….

[ceaselessims]

the fact that martin blackwood haters exist is so confusing to me like he's a bitch who moans and complains but also sets fire to things for fun and successfully manipulates avatars and gets jealous about the avatar of death waking up his boyfriend up from a coma and is both jon's staunchest defender and not afraid to call out jon's bullshit