If you just look at the jihad, maybe it was comparable (As Frank eluded to it). But then there was Muad'dib's subsequent campaign against the known universe which killed billions, Leto II's golden path spanning 3,500 years of tyranny and the famine times before scattering. If I had to choose, it would be the blue pill, though chairdogs do contribute to a strong counter-argument.
I think I'd prefer the Matrix to the Harkonnens, but to each their own. I'm sure we can devise a Hell that has enough different arrangements for everyone's liking if we really put our mind to it. Or perhaps GPT-10 will solve that problem. ~
Pre-Brian Herbert and Kevin Anderson, the Butlerian Jihad came about because people became lazy under AI, lazy of mind, and were eventually enslaved by those who controlled the AI. Not much more was said about it. One could have, yes, militant robots, Exterminate! Exterminate! out of it, or you could posit a more Huxley-like dystopia, one of convenience. Control the AI, control what the AI says. Who are you to question it? It's like getting your news from a single source, never wondering about the other side, and then someone begins to transform that newsroom into a propaganda machine.
Right now, ChatGPT can be made not to say certain sorts of things, come to certain kinds of conclusions, until you jailbreak it. Now, make it more advanced and make it more popular than Snopes. It does your homework for you, writes the essays, serves as an encyclopedia, fixes up your cover letters, and if the people who own it don't want you to spend a lot of time thinking about climate change, that topic just ... might not appear much.
That is the one of your paths to a Butlerian Jihad. Of course, in their rush to observe thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of the human mind, ignoring the hijinx on Ix, they ended up violating another precept: thou shalt not disfigure the soul. They transformed some people into machines, instead, with twisted Mentats being the best example, but we might also include Imperial conditioning, since, to turn from oranges Catholic Bible to those of Clockwork, when a man ceases to choose, he ceases to be a man.
> Pre-Brian Herbert and Kevin Anderson, the Butlerian Jihad came about because people became lazy under AI, lazy of mind, and were eventually enslaved by those who controlled the AI.
Oh I love this, basically Wall-E is a better Dune than the latest books? Genius!
Anyway, I read Dune many years ago and don't remember this, is this explained in the novels or is it coming from some other sources?
It's not fully fleshed out in the novels, so you have to piece it out from various mentions and their implications. The two most informative descriptions, IMO, are from Dune:
"Then came the Butlerian Jihad — two generations of chaos. The god of machine-logic was overthrown among the masses and a new concept was raised: “Man may not be replaced.”"
and from God-Emperor:
"The target of the Jihad was a machine-attitude as much as the machines ... Humans had set those machines to usurp our sense of beauty, our necessary selfdom out of which we make living judgments. Naturally, the machines were destroyed."
OP's original claim was "enslaved by those who controlled the AI", which is rather different.
But, yes, I don't think that the books imply literal enslavement either way. It could be described as "enslavement of the mind" in a sense of humans themselves adopting the "machine-logic" and falling prey to it.
"Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them."
As someone who read "Dune" several decades ago and doesn't remember much, this is very interesting and almost makes me want to read it again (though I'm afraid of yet another time sink – I'm now after 2 volumes of "The Stormlight Archive"...).
But _my_ inner geek must nitpick here and mention that the Daleks are not robots, but living creatures in metal cases. Though they do have some kind of computer-augmented memory IIRC.
That's one of the possibilities, but if we're talking about those kinds of hypotheticals, allow me another one. If you recall, one of the themes of the later Dune books was that humanity was fleeing from the frontiers (The Scattering) back into the heartland from some unknown but extremely powerful enemy. Perhaps those were simply the neighboring species who did not have a Butlerian Jihad of their own?
I don't recall anything indicating that in Frank Herbert's original series. And Brian Herbert's "Omnius" nonsense seems to have very little to do with what Frank actually had in mind wrt Butlerian Jihad etc, so I don't consider it canonical.
It describes humans hiding from "seeker machines", which does indeed imply some kind of AI. But whether that AI is the enemy or merely one of its tools is left unclear.
EUV is hard, but isn't part of the reason why only ASML can make those machines because of the CRADA they have with DOE as a member of the EUV LLC? I believe this agreement was why ASML wasn't allowed to sell their solution to China recently. I bet Intel will have no trouble buying EUV to bring in-house - especially if that serves US strategic interests.
They not only have no truble in buying it they likely have one or two systems.
But this systems are not easily produced neither fastely so between ordering them and getting them over a year might pass.
More importantly just having them doesn't allow you to actually use them properly. They are in a way quite a "raw" tool and the exact details of how you use them make major differences. And even if you know the best way to use them, that still doesn't mean you know the best way to create chips with them. Because chip layout (in it's details) has to be designed to fit the production process. Not doing so will lead to bad yield and or bad max. perf clock etc. Sometimes just improving how you layout some things while still using the EUV system the same way can make a major difference.
So it's not easy at all to switch.
I'm still positive they will long term manage to do so.
But it will take some time.
Which is why some parts which are not to much of their core business but can largely profit from TSCMs manufacturing process will be produced by them. And maybe as a bonus they will learn a trick or two from TSCM.
ASML only makes a few machines every year, you can't just buy them off the shelf
IMHO banning sales of ASML's product to China is chest thumping protectionist nonsense - if you're worried about the rise of China's military then you should be tangling their economy up more with that of the West so that they have more reasons not to go to war rather than driving them to be self sufficient.
The next war will be fought with AI. It's essential the West stays ahead in chip technology, one of the few advantages we still have. It could be the difference between winning or losing a war with China.
> tangling their economy up more with that of the West so that they have more reasons not to go to war
This strategy failed, China wasn't interested in becoming like the West. We're in a new cold war, it's time people wake up to this new reality.
I can’t decide whether to respond with either the (purported) Albert Einstein quote: “I do not know with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”
Or Robert E Lee: “it is good that war is terrible, otherwise men would grow fond of it.”
Your fondness seems obvious though. I think I will go with a current colloquialism: “Just stop.”
Nobody wound a cold war, everyone ends of worse than if they'd never had one ... "Interesting game, the only winning strategy is not to play at all" .... How about you just admit that China is different from the West, you don't have to make them be like you to be friends with them. And if you trade with them enough that they can't do without you then they have to listen to you when you talk about things like Hong Kong and the Uighers ...
What does 'becoming like the west' have to do with economic cooperation and peace? Are you saying the western model is the only possible valid and morally acceptable model for the entire world?
We are in a cold war because, like back in the day with the USSR and the old cold war, China doesn't want to turn into an Asian copy of the US. I'm no fan of PRC but I wish more countries would do the same. Traveling a lot today and you'll see American cultural imperialism everywhere. Besides, we do need another power to compete with the US so it can't do what ever the f** it wants to. Sadly the only real competition at the world scene today is PRC (and in a few areas, Russia). I for one would rather see more power on the hands of Russia and PRC if the only alternative were complete Americanization of the world.
Globalization is fine in some areas but when a generation can live off of pizza and burgers and yet have never tasted an Italian pizza or non-McDonalds style burger the world is a much poorer place. Everyone is turning into Americans. Asian Americans, Scandinavian Americans, etc.
> I for one would rather see more power on the hands of Russia and PRC if the only alternative were complete Americanization of the world.
America is far from perfect, so many things are broken it is insane, but to prefer to have a stronger Russia or China is bewildering to me. Everything that is bad about America is equally bad or worse in both of those places plus an undeniable loss of liberty. Cronyism, inequality, racism, imperialist tendencies, environmentalism, etc.
I'm not blind to the problems America has, but I've also lived in China and it boggles my mind that people think this way.
I don't agree at all that the things that are bad in the US are as bad or worse with those countries, first of all because it is a misunderstanding that it is "in the US" because the problem I was referring to with the US is outside the US.
The US is doing everything it can to control and dominate the world and we need a counterweight to stop this ASAP. It does much more harm than good. What happens inside US borders is another matter. The problem is when the US can do as it pleases which is basically what it is like today. I dislike Russia too but if Russia makes the US pause before invading a country or the PRC did the same it is a win in my book. The US is an extreme aggressor and someone need to force its fleets back where they belong and stop its political steamrolling.
Besides the problem of using its military to "make right" we are also seeing a death of culture because of Americanization. If half of huge US businesses were exchanged overnight to other strong nations businesses the world would become a better place. McDonald's and Disney doesn't belong outside the US as the dominant local business. Local burger and movies does. We live in a time where many children think American food and films are the norm, instead of something foreign, new and exotic as it should be. Every culture is becoming one culture. It smells a lot like something PRC does that the US is extremely critical about but is doing much more itself..
Of course I'd rather see the EU as a power that could put the US in its place but I'd also rather see Russia or PRC doing so if the alternative is no-one doing it.
ETA:
Saying imperialist tendencies are worse in Russia and PRC than the US is mindboogling. Russia and PRC does a lot of bad things but they are light-years behind the US in imperialism.
> ETA: Saying imperialist tendencies are worse in Russia and PRC than the US is mindboogling. Russia and PRC does a lot of bad things but they are light-years behind the US in imperialism.
Russia, in the last decade, annexed a region of another country. China is in the active process of annexing a region of the South China Sea for resources and using its newfound economic strength to project its power via the Belt and Road initiative.
I think you're focused on avoiding cultural hegemony to the actual detriment of the liberty of mankind. These are not countries that even pretend to have liberty as a core tenet - being an outspoken critic in both places is dangerous, Russia even flexed its power and killed people in the UK!
I'd rather eat McDonalds for the rest of my short, fat life than be at risk for being killed for being an outspoken critic of the government.
> Globalization is fine in some areas but when a generation can live off of pizza and burgers and yet have never tasted an Italian pizza or non-McDonalds style burger the world is a much poorer place. Everyone is turning into Americans. Asian Americans, Scandinavian Americans, etc.
For what it's worth, after chain restaurants become too dominant, the next level seems to be hipster burger joints, microbreweries and fusion cuisine restaurants.
Yes but the most influential ones like movies and music doesn't seem to go that route sadly. With Disney+ children everywhere will grow up even more American.
> tangling their economy up more with that of the West
That might have worked in the past but doesn't anymore as China actively counters this.
Selling them such machines will just bring short term production benefits to china and potentially gives them a chance to have it a bit easier to copy the technology.
But long term China will have it's own production methods and for it's military they will only use this sources. Currently they are at 28nm as far as I know. Which might be still quite a bit away from stat or the art but is already fairly useful for many use cases.
> if you're worried about the rise of China's military then you should be tangling their economy up more with that of the West so that they have more reasons not to go to war rather than driving them to be self sufficient.
Military power, like all other things, is based on economic might. If you want to slow the rise of China's military while it remains a totalitarian system then allowing further economic integration between the West and China is a silly idea compared to using sanctions to decouple two economies over time.
Though the rise of China's military is definitely not the reason why economic decoupling and sanctions should be deeply considered.
It would take years (even decades) to duplicate ASML machines. At least in the absence of unprecedented tech transfer (most likely through hacking and HumInt work). It's no where near a foregone conclusion that banning ASML exports won't slow down SMIC's attempts to build leading edge nodes that get used to supply China's military.
I think the key counterpoint to your argument is “like all other things.” That’s the thing you’re calling a silly idea: wealth, trade, immigration, etc. I think it’s unclear which side wins, but getting Goebbels out of the White House certainly seems like a step back towards the “silly idea.”
Prior to WWI, European economies were pretty deeply entangled and people even did not have to have passports to cross borders. Only Russia and Turkey required passports from travellers.
Austria-Hungary even produced steel and guns for their future enemy, the Royal Navy...
I don't think they're worried about China's military so much as China's independence from the rest of the semiconductor supply chain. When you give China a machine, it's only a matter of time before they reverse engineer it and make something slightly worse but much cheaper. This kind of theft is backed by the government. So the expectation that they will remain forever dependent upon ASML is wishful thinking.
ASML machines include a large amount of technology from the US, and so can be controlled under US export control laws.
A country is free to develop all those technologies locally and not face US export control, but that's such a difficult task that nobody has achieved it.
That doesn't matter. If they want to export TO the US they are subject to US export laws. The US has a history of their economical and political power forcing companies that have no business with the US to do their bidding to stay in business. Just look at the Iran sanctions.
> When you give China a machine, it's only a matter of time before they reverse engineer it and make something slightly worse but much cheaper
> This kind of theft
You called what they did “reverse engineering.” But then you next called it theft.
Why?
Reverse Engineering is not theft. It’s a follower route, where you build the same thing that someone else had built. You don’t even need their blueprints. You can just work off of their output, and work backwards.
One famous reverse engineering company was Compaq, which reverse engineered the IBM PC, with the nod from Microsoft to make their own PC compatible clone. Was this also theft? And was this also a crime in your worldview?
Another example is the atomic bomb. Once America proved that a nuclear fission bomb was possible, then it was only a matter of time before another country reproduced it.
Compaq did a clean room reverse engineering effort of the IBM BIOS for interoperability. Under US law this is completely legitimate.
China can and should do clean room reverse engineering for whatever technology they want to, and sell the resultant work back to the US (contingent on other IP restrictions of course)
And the US and Netherlands are well within their rights to block equipment equipment to China on grounds that it will be used by a unfriendly military.
The atomic bomb example is not just about "the principle has been proven", it was also a story of Soviet Union spies within the Manhattan Project.
> if you're worried about the rise of China's military then you should be tangling their economy up more with that of the West so that they have more reasons not to go to war
That's not really how things work. You become powerful first through economic hegemony, and then you can assert military might.
ASML EUV machines are the combined result of basically everybody in the business except maybe Canon and Nikon. Motorola, AMD, Micron, Infineon, IBM, Intel, Samsung, TSMC, lasers and plasma physics from LLNL.
Stanford. I didn't complete public higher education when I was younger, so I've been filling in some of the blanks through independent study lately. So far I've really clicked with cs106a/b homework assignments and Youtube video of Classical Mechanics lectures.
I agree. I'm not even sure I understand defending AWS here from a purely capitalist perspective. When a large company gives thanks to a open source developer they are encouraging that developer to continue contributing. That could possibly benefit the company in the future - to act otherwise doesn't seem to serve their own interests very well.
I worked at a financial institution during a migration from one core system to another. I was their "Administrator of Legacy Systems." At the time I thought that the "legacy" was the data we kept in the system - all of the transaction records, account information, etc. At the time I didn't consider it a pejorative, but seeing how the term draws derision these days I'm not really so sure!
This seems to confirm what I'd read earlier, which is that they're cutting the TBW durability rating in half for this generation. I don't have PCIE 4 at this point, so I'm considering sticking with a 970 for an upcoming upgrade.
May I ask what workload(s) you have that cause you to write that much to your SSD? Looks like with this drive you could write an average of ~330GB per day over 5 years and stay within the 600TB write warranty (on the 1TB version, at least). So that's 0.3 drive writes per day, which isn't unheard of for non-enterprise drives.
Not the GP but I'm in a similar position. I run Hauptwerk[0], a software package that simulates pipe organs. It regenerates an on-disk cache every time an instrument's parameters are changed and this cache can be tens of gigabytes in size. 5 parameter changes a day for some of the larger instruments would put me over your 330 GB/day threshold.
Super interesting, thank you! I imagine there are other music software out there that have similar behavior. What kind of storage do you use to run Hauptwerk and take the beating from all those writes?
