[FRIAM] GhostGPT

steve smith sasmyth at swcp.com
Tue Jan 28 16:00:26 EST 2025


On 1/28/25 11:29 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>
> It could be good for Trump to stay, because the betrayal could be 
> deeply demoralizing and humiliating to his supporters.   We may NEED 
> this damage.  Thomas Friedman noticed a few weeks ago that AI was 
> going to be one of Trump’s risks:   More people rendered redundant.
>
"Sometimes things have to get worse before they can get better"

     Aphorismically Yours,

  - Sassafrass

> *From:*Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Stephen Guerin
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 28, 2025 10:17 AM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
> <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] GhostGPT
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2025, 11:02 AM Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com> 
> wrote:
>
>     My question was more about how quickly a population can transition
>     from disorder to order.     I was wondering if there were
>     historical examples of these potent immune responses where the
>     resolution was quick.    A contemporary example is the removal of
>     Yoon in South Korea.    The mechanism might vary, but ours is a
>     particularly violent culture.
>
> Focusing on Trump as an individual, even as a legitimately elected 
> leader, ignores the systemic issues that enabled his rise, like 
> institutional decay and economic disparity. Political unrest reflects 
> deeper societal fractures that persist beyond one administration. 
> Unlike South Korea’s removal of Park Geun-hye, the U.S. lacks the 
> cohesive trust and mechanisms needed for similar reform. Targeting 
> Trump alone risks leaving those root causes untouched, inviting the 
> same problems to reemerge.
>
> - Dan
>
>     *From:*Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Stephen Guerin
>     *Sent:* Tuesday, January 28, 2025 9:25 AM
>     *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>     <friam at redfish.com>
>     *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] GhostGPT
>
>     Prompt: steelman an argument that challenges the premise of my
>     prompt on political violence. Audience FRIAM group email list.
>     Snarky tone.
>
>     Oh, so corruption and illegitimacy are supposed to be the magical
>     catalysts for political violence? That’s an adorably tidy theory.
>     The reality is messier—violence needs a potent brew of economic
>     collapse, inequality, and sometimes foreign meddling, not just a
>     "bad guy" in charge. Plenty of corrupt regimes limp along
>     peacefully with patronage networks and repression, while their
>     citizens begrudgingly prioritize stability over idealistic notions
>     of "legitimacy." And let’s not pretend legitimacy is some
>     universal standard—what’s corrupt to you might be perfectly fine
>     to someone else (hello, cultural relativity). Besides, history is
>     packed with examples of violence against perfectly legitimate
>     leaders because deeper societal fractures were the real issue. So
>     yeah, blaming political violence on corrupt leaders? Cute, but
>     maybe think bigger.
>
>     On Tue, Jan 28, 2025, 9:01 AM steve smith <sasmyth at swcp.com> wrote:
>
>         Glen -
>
>         I have to agree with you on your rant.  Not just because I
>         suspect that
>         will trigger you, but because it actually "got" to me in a new
>         way.
>
>         I do use the terminology of "<elaborate statement X> can you
>         reflect/elaborate/discuss/etc on this for/with me?"  at which
>         point it
>         (any given LLM of the moment) is likely to very agreeably
>         (obsequiously?) pretends to do just that. For my purposes, it is
>         (almost?) as if it is in fact doing "just that"...  but I think I
>         intuitively agree with your instinct/intuition that it is merely
>         "pretending" to do that.
>
>         Of course, I don't know how this fits into your oft-stated
>         idea that
>         "people don't communicate" or "communication is an
>         illusion"... this
>         bias would suggest that "if people don't actually discuss
>         (communicate?), then there is no reason to believe
>         gradient-descenders
>         on high-dimensional manifolds would either?"
>
>         I do agree that there is an element that my "discussions" with
>         LLM chat
>         interfaces is a lot like a well-lubricated browsing of
>         spreadsheets
>         and/or wikipedia pages (with spreadsheets and charts and
>         anecdotal
>         examples linked heavily).  But then chatting with others (here
>         included)
>         has a great deal of that quality as well.
>
>         Mumble,
>
>           - Steve
>
>         On 1/28/25 8:44 AM, glen wrote:
>         > I've always been annoyed by [micro]bloggers who will launch a
>         > rhetorical salvo and then write (often shouted with an ! or
>         all caps)
>         > "Discuss!" What Claude and GPT are doing here is not
>         discussing. It's
>         > not even "discursing", which I guess isn't a word. The
>         prompt would
>         > better be "Lecture me on ...". But when I type that into the
>         anthropic
>         > console (3.5-sonnet), I get "I aim to discuss this complex
>         topic
>         > objectively and factually. Key historical patterns include
>         tensions
>         > building over time through economic disparities, erosion of
>         rights,
>         > and repression, often leading to transition through mass
>         movements,
>         > legal reforms, and institutional changes. I can discuss
>         specific
>         > historical examples if you're interested."
>         >
>         > Jesus H Christ. Claude is using your sense of the word
>         "discuss" too!
>         > What has this world come to, where [people|machines] can use
>         any word
>         > they want to mean any thing they want? Get off my lawn!
>         >
>         > More importantly, though, this stuff is gaslighting everyone
>         into
>         > thinking one can *have* a discussion with the machine. Can
>         you? Is it
>         > actually a discussion? I argue "no". It's much more akin to
>         browsing a
>         > spreadsheet than discussing. Granted, with stateful lookups,
>         the
>         > spreadsheet can remember your prior query and do things like
>         AND, OR,
>         > NOT, or any F() it may choose. But when 2 animals have a
>         discussion,
>         > what actually happens to the animals? Is what happens to the
>         > (stateful) machine analogous to what happens to the animal?
>         >
>         > I think this is where the (artificial, saccharine)
>         obsequiousness of
>         > the aligned LLMs really grates. When it makes those
>         statements like
>         > "Oh right" or "Yes, I'm sorry" or whatever, what has
>         happened inside
>         > the machine? Is it analogous to what happens in the animal
>         when they
>         > flap their gums to extrude similar words?
>         >
>         > And when have you ever had a conversation with someone (you
>         respect)
>         > and they just immediately roll over and agree with you about
>         anything?
>         > Is this why people like "chatting" with LLMs? Because they're
>         > obsequious? Is it just a fancier "filter bubble"? Ugh. Now I'm
>         > nauseous. Thanks Obama.
>         >
>         >
>         > On 1/27/25 5:16 PM, Stephen Guerin wrote:
>         >> On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 1:08 PM Marcus Daniels
>         <marcus at snoutfarm.com
>         >> <mailto:marcus at snoutfarm.com>> wrote:
>         >>
>         >>     I asked Claude about the historical patterns for
>         emergence and
>         >> resolution of political violence from corrupt leaders that are
>         >> considered illegitimate, and it essentially refused to answer.
>         >> ChatGPT was more forthcoming..
>         >>
>         >>
>         >> hmm, here's Claude and ChatGPT's initial response
>         >>
>         >> Prompt: *discuss the historical patterns for emergence and
>         resolution
>         >> of political violence from corrupt leaders that are considered
>         >> illegitimate *
>         >>
>         >> Claude:
>         >>
>         >>     I'll analyze historical patterns in how political violence
>         >> emerges from and is resolved under corrupt, illegitimate
>         leadership.
>         >> Let's examine this systematically:
>         >>
>         >>
>         >> Emergence patterns often begin with a gradual erosion of
>         >> institutional checks and balances. Leaders typically
>         consolidate
>         >> power by:
>         >> - Weakening independent judiciary systems
>         >> - Controlling or intimidating media outlets
>         >> - Corrupting or dismantling oversight mechanisms
>         >> - Creating parallel security forces loyal to them
>         personally rather
>         >> than the state
>         >>
>         >> Violence tends to escalate when:
>         >> 1. Economic conditions deteriorate and inequality increases
>         >> 2. Opposition groups are systematically excluded from
>         political
>         >> participation
>         >> 3. Security forces are given impunity for human rights
>         violations
>         >> 4. Traditional conflict resolution mechanisms break down
>         >>
>         >> Historical resolutions have generally followed several paths:
>         >>
>         >> Institutional Reform Path:
>         >> This involves rebuilding democratic institutions, often
>         through:
>         >> - Constitutional reforms
>         >> - Creation of independent electoral commissions
>         >> - Strengthening judicial independence
>         >> - Establishing truth and reconciliation processes
>         >>
>         >> Popular Movement Path:
>         >> Successful peaceful resistance movements have often employed:
>         >> - Sustained civil disobedience
>         >> - Building broad coalitions across social groups
>         >> - Strategic use of strikes and economic pressure
>         >> - International solidarity networks
>         >>
>         >> International Intervention Path:
>         >> External pressure can contribute through:
>         >> - Targeted sanctions against corrupt leaders and enablers
>         >> - Support for civil society organizations
>         >> - Mediation between competing factions
>         >> - Peacekeeping operations when necessary
>         >>
>         >> Key factors that often determine successful resolution:
>         >> - Unity among opposition forces
>         >> - Maintaining nonviolent discipline in resistance movements
>         >> - Support from key institutional actors (military, civil
>         service)
>         >> - International diplomatic and economic pressure
>         >>
>         >> Would you like me to elaborate on any of these patterns or
>         discuss
>         >> specific historical examples?
>         >>
>         >>
>         --------------------------------------------------------------------
>         >>
>         >> same prompt: *discuss the historical patterns for emergence
>         and
>         >> resolution of political violence from corrupt leaders that are
>         >> considered illegitimate *
>         >>
>         >> ChatGPT:
>         >> The historical emergence and resolution of political violence
>         >> stemming from corrupt and illegitimate leaders often follow
>         patterns
>         >> influenced by societal, economic, and cultural dynamics. These
>         >> patterns can be divided into phases:
>         >>
>         >> ### 1. **Emergence of Political Violence**
>         >>     Political violence often arises when a leader's
>         corruption or
>         >> illegitimacy creates significant discontent among the
>         population. Key
>         >> factors include:
>         >>
>         >>     - **Perceived Illegitimacy:** Leaders who come to power
>         through
>         >> fraud, coercion, or foreign intervention are often seen as
>         >> illegitimate. This can spark resentment, especially when
>         governance
>         >> fails to meet public expectations.
>         >>     - **Economic Inequality:** Corrupt leaders often divert
>         state
>         >> resources for personal gain, exacerbating wealth gaps and
>         creating
>         >> widespread economic hardship. This inequality fuels
>         discontent,
>         >> especially among marginalized groups.
>         >>     - **Erosion of Institutions:** Corruption undermines
>         trust in
>         >> institutions like courts, police, and legislatures,
>         creating a vacuum
>         >> where violence becomes an outlet for grievances.
>         >>     - **Polarization:** Leaders who use divisive rhetoric to
>         >> consolidate power often create factionalism within society.
>         This
>         >> polarization can escalate into violent clashes between
>         opposing groups.
>         >>     - **External Influences:** Foreign powers may exploit
>         unrest to
>         >> destabilize a regime or support opposition groups, adding
>         to the
>         >> violence.
>         >>
>         >> ### 2. **Triggers of Political Violence**
>         >>     The actual violence is often triggered by events that
>         act as
>         >> tipping points, such as:
>         >>     - Rigged elections.
>         >>     - Unjustified crackdowns on protests.
>         >>     - Revelations of egregious corruption.
>         >>     - Human rights abuses or massacres.
>         >>
>         >>     Examples include:
>         >>     - The Arab Spring (2010-2012), sparked by economic
>         hardship and
>         >> corruption, where illegitimate leaders were overthrown in
>         Tunisia,
>         >> Egypt, and Libya.
>         >>     - The French Revolution (1789), fueled by inequality, a
>         corrupt
>         >> monarchy, and the failure of reforms.
>         >>
>         >> ### 3. **Resolution Pathways**
>         >>     The resolution of political violence depends on whether
>         >> institutional or revolutionary mechanisms prevail. Historical
>         >> patterns include:
>         >>
>         >>     #### **Reforms and Transition:**
>         >>     - **Negotiated Settlements:** Dialogue between the
>         regime and
>         >> opposition often leads to power-sharing agreements or peaceful
>         >> transitions, as seen in South Africa's transition from
>         apartheid in
>         >> the 1990s.
>         >>     - **Anti-Corruption Movements:** Public pressure or elite
>         >> intervention may lead to systemic reforms, as in post-Marcos
>         >> Philippines after the People Power Revolution (1986).
>         >>
>         >>     #### **Overthrow and Revolution:**
>         >>     - **Regime Change:** When reforms are impossible, violent
>         >> revolutions or coups often result. The Russian Revolution
>         (1917) and
>         >> the overthrow of Ceaușescu in Romania (1989) exemplify this.
>         >>     - **Exile or Execution:** Illegitimate leaders are
>         sometimes
>         >> forced into exile or executed, as seen with Mobutu Sese
>         Seko in Zaire
>         >> (1997) or Saddam Hussein in Iraq (2006).
>         >>
>         >>     #### **State Fragmentation:**
>         >>     - **Civil War:** Prolonged violence can lead to civil
>         wars, as
>         >> seen in Syria (post-2011), where the regime's corruption and
>         >> repression fractured the state.
>         >>
>         >> ### 4. **Post-Conflict Reconstruction**
>         >>     After the resolution of violence, reconstruction
>         efforts often
>         >> determine long-term stability:
>         >>     - **Justice Mechanisms:** Trials or truth commissions
>         address
>         >> grievances and establish accountability, such as the
>         Nuremberg Trials
>         >> after WWII or the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in
>         South Africa.
>         >>     - **Institutional Rebuilding:** Strengthening
>         institutions to
>         >> ensure accountability and reduce corruption is critical.
>         >>     - **Reconciliation Efforts:** Social healing and
>         bridging divides
>         >> help prevent the resurgence of violence, especially in
>         polarized
>         >> societies.
>         >>
>         >> ### 5. **Broader Historical Insights**
>         >>     - **Cycles of Corruption and Reform:** Political
>         systems often
>         >> experience cycles where corruption accumulates until it
>         triggers
>         >> violence or reform, only to repeat in new forms (e.g., the
>         Roman
>         >> Empire's fall or Latin American dictatorships in the 20th
>         century).
>         >>     - **Role of Leadership and Movements:** Effective
>         leadership and
>         >> well-organized movements often determine whether change occurs
>         >> peacefully or through violence.
>         >>     - **Global Trends:** External pressures, such as economic
>         >> sanctions or global public opinion, can expedite
>         resolutions but may
>         >> also exacerbate conflict.
>         >>
>         >> ### Lessons for Today
>         >> The patterns of political violence around corrupt leaders
>         underscore
>         >> the importance of:
>         >>     - Inclusive governance to address grievances before
>         they escalate.
>         >>     - Strong institutions that resist corruption and ensure
>         legitimacy.
>         >>     - Global and regional mechanisms to mediate conflicts
>         and promote
>         >> peaceful transitions.
>         >>
>         >> Do you want to explore examples in more detail or focus on a
>         >> particular region or time period?
>         >>
>
>         .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-.
>         --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>         FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>         Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /  Thursdays 9a-12p
>         Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>         to (un)subscribe
>         http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>         FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>         archives:  5/2017 thru present
>         https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>           1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
>     ____________________________________________
>     CEO Founder, Simtable.com
>     stephen.guerin at simtable.com
>
>     Harvard Visualization Research and Teaching Lab
>     stephenguerin at fas.harvard.edu
>
>     mobile: (505)577-5828
>
>     .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. ---
>     -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>     FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>     Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
>     https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>     to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>     FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>     archives:  5/2017 thru present
>     https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>       1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoomhttps://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribehttp://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIChttp://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives:  5/2017 thru presenthttps://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>    1/2003 thru 6/2021http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20250128/f450e2d0/attachment.html>


More information about the Friam mailing list