we’re going into a phase of many paradoxes ai has run out of surface level data to use to train, at the same time there’s never been more data being created and data has never been less valuable. human behaviour itself has compounded into an asymmetric dynamic; the natural behaviour filters away from where data accrues, and behaviour that remains is just compounded pattern matching. many layers of arbitrage are at play that compound the systemic gaps for their own inference value, and approaching it at the end of the feedback loops only compounds them. human data has become more valuable, not less, while at the same time the formative human part is entirely unaddressed in how that interfaces with the inference within digital systems - data isn’t necessary human, it’s just something that’s generated and assumed to be human (no device, identifier, or generation of identifier) is systemically the inference (and as systems they compound against their own proposition). ai generates the majority of data, and is getting better at pattern matching to behaviour, images, videos, documents. so we cross escape velocity for a negative feedback loop ai trains itself to generate the data that then is the inputs it infers as human to train on true, formative, human behaviour filters more and more away from the means that produces discernible data, and the remaining surface compounds as lemon market which in turn compounds the diminishing unaddressed principles/ foundations that inference itself is an output from and the arbitrage compounds, as the individual (task) value per human decreases but the wider value of human connection to digital systems and to each other (all value is derived, even if layers removed, from human action - value is a literal construct of what humans can do with [fill in the blank]) no proposition where tech measures humans is the answer, all are built on misunderstood first principles and are definable paradoxes/ actually compound against their own purported shape

I just be saying the same thing for years but i slowly have to stop saying it’s going to happen and change my semantics to calibrate to the fact that it’s happened or is happening

there is no [tech measures us] approach that works. tech may be a conduit, but any of the hundreds of approach of scanning eyeballs or hands or biometrics or identifiers are definably not the solution and end up calling themselves things that they are not there are many obvious and subtle paradoxes to any of these approaches, but the fact remains that [tech measuring us] can only be the answer is a hyper-dystopic world that maybe isn’t even possible and verges on science fiction

a global central arbiter and all-government cohort with cameras in literally every physical space, assuming many orders of magnitude increase in hardware for things that currently aren’t possible by any means. and power laws, asymmetry, only compound in trying to get there. which ultimately defeat the related assumptions of the outcome the only answer is human. and the difficult thing therein is how that fact interfaces with tech. whether it does or not, that’s the only viable path - and if it doesn’t, then we continue the compounded regression state of overall game theories for human coordination - you can already make a group with your friends and coordinate that it’s them. without an internet (interconnected network) of that effect, power laws play out just the same so the permanent underclass meme, but not for money