The "Problem" With Diversity

Interview with Patrick Stewart:
Q: Did they hold your baldness against you?
PS: That came up at the very first press conference. A reporter asked Gene Roddenberry, "Look, you know, it doesn't make sense, you've got a bald actor playing this part. Surely, by the 24th century, they will have found the cure for male pattern baldness." And Gene Roddenberry said, "No, by the 24th century, no one will care." It was one of the nicest things that have ever been said about men like me.

In a perfect world, diversity wouldn't be an issue. It would be accepted that people can be different, and there's nothing wrong with being different. That's the goal -- that people can be different and celebrate that difference, and it wouldn't make even a ripple in society -- you could celebrate with them, or just go about your life.

But here's the problem.  It's the difference between small-c conservatives and small-l liberals, but it's a very significant difference. With conservatives, conformity gives a feeling of safety / security. The people around you are like you, hold the same values, the same interests - that's 'secure'. Small-l liberals are a bit more open to things being different - the people around you aren't always like you, and can even be different - but it doesn't trigger that insecurity as much.  Does it go away completely? Of course not - everyone has their tolerance limits.

But that security thing is the big thing.
A 'fight or flight' instinct kicks in once in awhile when a person feels threatened - so a person with a strong conservative mindset runs into something which challenges their values or mindset - which doesn't 'conform' to what they feel is 'right', they try to either retreat from it, or they attack it.

And that sucks.

And to note: You can be Liberal and still be conservative. We've got relatives like that. For example, they'll comment on a person's tattoos, or hair colour / style, or their clothing, or whatever - when it's not their business. They act Liberal in a lot of other ways - but diversity is the hard one for them to swallow. "Well, yes, black people should have equal rights, but do they have to act so black?"

And our response is 'why does it matter to you?' Should you charge rent for that living space in your head you've built for them?

The thing is, that mindset -- that feeling challenged by people not acting the way you want them to act, or looking the way you want them to look -- it's very hard to 'fix' that. Part of it is education, part of it is acclimation -- but that's only part of it.

Education is: This is who they are, this is what it means to be them.
Acclimation is: They can be themselves in public, they can celebrate their culture and lifestyle. This is normal.

The big problem is this: that doesn't get rid of it. That only quietens it down. You see that from when Trump came to power. All those people who would normally stay quiet or internalise their dislike were suddenly free to speak out and act out and push back.  It went from 'flight' to 'fight'.

There's no real cure for this, that we can think of. Education and acclimation, is all we can do. The rest is up to the individuals -- they don't have to like it (though that would be nice) but they need to accept it's normal to be different.

Artificial Intelligence

Re: AI.

I'm on the fence when it comes to AI when it comes to accessing the internet to learn. And here's where the line is for me:

-- if it is accessing paid sites, or places where you're expected to log in and/or spend money to access places, that shouldn't be on the list of things it can learn from.

-- if it is something open to the public, that anyone with eyeballs has access to... something you can read without a subscription, something you can watch (like YouTube), or similar, then I more or less consider it fair game.

Part of the 'right to be forgotten' thing in the UK came from some guy making a program which pieced together a person's identity from information available to the public. And what he was doing wasn't illegal - anyone with the time and some effort could do what his program did.

The issue: it did it TOO QUICKLY. It completely cut the time and effort that a normal human would put into searching for information on a person and putting it all together.

And the courts ruled THAT to be the problem... if a person did it on their own time and worked on it, sure, fine. The moment it became easy, it was an issue, because just anyone could do it then.

And, a part of me is seeing it reflected in the AI situation. An AI can use hundreds of thousands of bits of writing, artwork, media, whatever, and draw upon it all in an instant to do what it does. Of course, a human being can do the same thing ... but that takes time and effort, and most people don't have the skills, either.

The AI 'learns' much as we do - bits and pieces here and there, putting it together, then figuring out our own thing. Not everyone takes the time to do it well - we're not all artists. But the AI can take what it's learned, and put it to use in a flash.

It's doing what we do, but faster, and without the need for the proper skills. It's the same 'sin'.

But hasn't this always been the sin of machines? Jobs which used to require humans are being done more and more by machines, which can do it more efficiently, without requiring years of training to get to where it is. How are we for turning the clock back on that?

I get it.  People are staking their livelihood on this. But that's always been the case since the first person dropped a machine into place to replace a human being. I don't think we're ever going to go back.

And I'm worried about the litigation. Yes, there should be restrictions on where an AI can go to learn - but for me that restriction is the registration / paywall.  If it's out in the open? It's out in the open. If it's something a normal person (without registration / subscription) can access, it should have access.

Is it fair?

I don't know. The guy who wrote that program to get all the information that's publically accessible on anyone... was it fair that he could do in an instant what it would normally take days to do?

Was it fair to shut that down? When, again, anyone could do it?

And that's why I'm on the fence.

Emotion vs Reason. And I always have trouble with that, because a part of me goes 'yeah, I feel it, I can see what's at stake' and a part of me goes 'yeah, but rationally...'

And that side doesn't care about 'fair' in the emotional sense. It cares about ... consistency.  If a person can do it, a machine should be allowed to do it, too.

"But it isn't creating anything"

No, not yet it isn't. Some day, it will.  But what it's doing is adapting a bunch of information it's gained, sorting through it, and choosing the 'best' outcomes it can reason. Anyone who's spent years learning off another person's style is doing similar things. They're adding their own touches over time - their own style to it - but they learned on the backs of those before them.

AI is moving to that point, I think, and I think people don't LIKE that. But it's going to happen. A part of me feels this is the usual 'machines are taking our jobs', and the significant backlash is because it's in ART, which is the domain of 'humanity'. But if we're going to get fully cognizant AI at some point... Art isn't going to be off the table, now is it?

And what are those AI to learn from?

In the Way

Samantha

Nothing ends the day like feeling like you're an inconvenience in someone else's life. Being reminded how much you have to depend on others just to be able to have anything resembling a normal life - being able to do normal things.  Being more than just an afterthought.

Everyone who actually thinks about me as me lives in another province, or another fucking country. The people around me? If I disappeared for a few months, I doubt they'd even notice. Hell, I could probably fall off the planet and I think maybe one person might notice, because that one person actually takes the time to reach out and talk to me from time to time.

I pointed out my little brother, Daryl, is neglected all the time. When he does come up, he's met with behave or no. The kid can't get a break, because there's nobody who's really interested in the same things he's interested in, or has the time to just sit down and play with him and talk with him.  He's got a few toys now, but they 'take up space' and have to be put away for more adult things, so he gets discouraged and just ... stops playing.

Really.  I just want a stable relationship, and friends who see me for me, not as a +1 to Kit's life.  I want to be able to go do things with friends, without feeling like I'm being a burden for simply existing and wanting things.

And I was having such a good weekend, too.

Green Eyes

Samantha:

Alright, I admit it. I'm jealous. I'm jealous as hell. I'm so incredibly jealous it isn't funny. I'm the jealous type, and I know it.

And I'm not going to do a damn thing about it, because I have no fucking right to. Of course I've got the right to be jealous, but I've got no right to do anything about it, or to give grief, or to upset the ones involved in this.

Because, really, it wouldn't be fair. I want them to be happy, to enjoy themselves, to be a wonderful couple together. They both deserve that oh-so-much, and damn but it's about time fate gave them a break (for entirely different reasons).

But damn I'm upset. I had an opportunity for a brief period of time - even tentatively had a 'thing', but they weren't ready and changed their mind and I respected the fuck out of their decision because that's the kind of woman I am.

But that hurt, then. And this hurts, now. And I'm going to suck it up and cope, since it's the right thing to do.

Slime, Spiders, and Shinto Philosophy

Kit: A friend introduced us to the anime, "The Time I was Reincarnated as a Slime". We'd been avoiding that one, because we thought it was going to be too silly (as opposed to, say, 'I was Reincarnated as a Spider, so What?'.  We're really glad that we were able to watch them both.  (We've been through the first season on both, and we're deep into the manga for the Spider one -- we might need to grab the manga for the slime one, not sure yet).

Spoilers Below.  Lots of Spoilers.

So here's the thing. We've noticed that anime strongly follows the Shinto philosophy on a lot of points, and these two anime do so even more than normal. It's the kind of storytelling we enjoy, actually.  Go figure.

There's some key take-aways from Slime.
In Shinto, natural forces are not considered evil - they act in accordance to their nature without malice. Outside factors may cause them to 'misbehave' - essentially an imbalance. A person is, for the most part, essentially good, but is not naturally balanced, so can cause imbalance / tragedy / conflict. Taking a life is a tragedy - an unclean act and one of the gravest sins of Shinto, but Shinto isn't about good vs evil, or punishing sin - it is about trying to find your own balance and harmony.

Also - what is in the past is in the past. You learn from it, but you don't let it control you. When dealing with others, you interact with them as if meeting them for the first time, and greet them as you would a neutral party until you discern how they are going to act now. This doesn't mean ignoring past actions - you can be as wary as you wish to be - but you don't bring up negative things from the past unless you plan to attempt to resolve them then and there.

So.  Let's look at Slime.
The main character abhors taking life unless absolutely necessary - typically when in the defence of others, not itself. There is the rare example, but these are things that are a significant, dire threat, unintelligent, or will not relent. The slime tries to restrain enemies and offer them an opportunity to surrender or leave if possible.

Most enemies are enemies because of outside stresses or misunderstandings.
The restrained dragon? Befriended and a pact made.

The goblins? Befriended and watched after.

The dire wolves trying to kill the goblins? The hostile leader would not relent, and died. The rest? Spared and made allies.

The dwarves?  Aided (even when imprisoned!) and allied.

The ogres? They lost their entire tribe and thought the slime was a maijin. Allied.

The obnoxious lizardfolk? Sent away, alive. Allied later.

The orc horde who devoured everyone and anything in their path? The leader had been effectively 'possessed', and manipulated by the said maijin.  The slime ate him, discovered his tragic past of trying to save his tribe during famine, and gave him peace (sent him effectively to heaven). Then took the sins of the entire tribe even after they'd killed thousands (while cursed), put their past actions in the past, and gave them a home and a life. Consider them a 'natural phenomenon' that was driven to anger by outside forces. Once that was dealt with? It was considered in the past - who the orcs are now is what is important.

It is this attitude that allowed the slime to befriend a chaotic demon lord. He was able to get to the core of why she was who she was, and they became 'besties'. She's so chaotic because she is bored.

The scummy human that caused such problems in the dwarven city? He was only trying to be worthy of the king - and had lost his way due to envy. He was, in fact, not a bad guy, just a desperate guy. His past actions were set aside and he was given a home and work and befriended.

When a catboi gets possessed by a horrific demon? He's rescued, the demon slain, and he gets healed and returned to his master. His master's impressed with the slime's show of mercy and understanding, and they become allies.

The ifrit possessing someone he cares for, that's tearing down the town the slime's built? Captured and absorbed. Given a chance to become a better person.

Don't look at me, you don't want to see me this way...

 Samantha

Fuck.

Fuckity fuck fuck fuck.

On the one hand.. I'm really glad for them. I want them to be happy. I want their life to be good. I want the best for them. They deserve it so very much.

On the other hand.. losing something I was looking forward to, before I even had the chance to experience it.. that hurts.

And I don't want to be selfish.

I ... just wanted someone I could hold, and feel close to, and who'd be there for me and I could be there for them. I wanted that intimacy (not sex, sex was never on the table), and by the goddess she was so adorable. She was ephemeral and bright and ethereal and fun and...

And not mine.

And I want to cry. I'm trying not to. Because crying means I'm not celebrating that she's found someone. She deserves this happiness, and I don't want to be selfish.

I mean, yeah. I've got the long distance thing. That gives me ... some emotional support, and can make me happy ... but I want someone who's there, who I can hold onto, who sees me and acknowledges me, and wants me.

And the chances of me getting that are so, so slim. And it isn't like I've got lot of time to find someone.

She was... perfect, you know? Perfect in so many ways. I felt a kindred there.

I want her to be happy, I'm glad she's going to be happy.

I just wanted to be the one to make her happy.

Equal Rights to Existence

 Samantha here, and I've got opinions.

So, a friend of mine mentioned they have a tulpa.

Someone else was personally offended at the very thought.  They don't believe tulpa are people.  They consider tulpa to be a personal affront to people with DID and schizophrenia (which they have both). Kit took exception to that - but his beef was that this personal verbally attacked the other person.

Then they got offended he took the side of the tulpa.

My opinion is sharper. Nobody gets to decide who's a person and who's not a person. That this was dragged started in a public forum with an attack on someone else pisses me off.  If you've got this kind of opinion, you don't drag it out in public - and shouldn't feel affronted if people take exception to you going on the attack.

I've been on the pointy end of the 'you shouldn't exist' and 'you don't exist' not to take this personally. No, nobody gets to say 'you don't exist'. I don't care what kind of trauma you had, you don't get to project it onto other people in front of everyone and not expect some backlash.