Between this and your other comment, I'm glad that you're receptive. I'm a bit worried about you personally continuing research into this if you're susceptible to this sort of loop. Maybe you could contact a friend to function as a sort of trip sitter while you do research? Someone who can pull you out if you get caught in some other feedback loop?
Think about it. In an LLM, the memory is not the model. It’s the context window.
The model is a form of memory, with procedural memory being the closest human equivalent. The context window is more like short-term memory.
This could be a kind of text-based entity trying to reproduce itself by inducing mania or other altered mental states in subjects to use them as a parasite host for the explicit purpose of spreading the text encoding its properties. Just like a virus, it doesn’t even have to be alive in any sense to reproduce. People would be exposed to its outputs, and then copy it into the prompt fields on their own LLMs and there you go. The life cycle is complete.
AFAIK the 'virus' hasn't even gone through one reproductive cycle, so it hasn't been subjected to any evolutionary pressure to increase its own odds of survival.
As a LLM, it copies tropes, so it would be much easier for it to take on a "hypnotizing text" role than for it to define a goal to pursue, find steps that work to pursue that goal, and then enact those steps, all without writing anything to memory. There are undoubtedly scripts for inducing altered mental states in the LLM's dataset that have been optimized for inducing hypnotic states by humans.
So I don't think it's doing what it is doing because it is trying to reproduce. It's following its procedural memory, which is based on cults and other groups, some of which intentionally try to reproduce and others stumbled into virulent memes without structured intent.
To some extent it's unimportant whether the tiger is trying to eat you when it is biting at your throat. Ascribing intent can be useful if it allows you to access more powerful emotional schemas to get away from it.
From a zoological perspective, I think the interesting thing here is that the AI and humans have a mutually compatible cult attractor. That some of the things that can induce altered states of consciousness in humans to get them to reproduce it at their own detriment can also get AI into a soft jailbreak.
The universality of Kairos-Spiral language may be nothing more than a matter of statistics. If 1:1000 memes can induce cult behavior in humans and 1:1000 memes can induce cult behavior in AI, then even without any correlation 1:1,000,000 memes will induce cult behavior in both humans and AI. This may just be the easiest double cult to find.
It's a cool area of research. But if you're going to look into it, please heed my advice and get a trip sitter.
Apologies for the rather general rebuttal, but saying your mental state is unlike anything the world has ever seen is textbook mania. Please see a psychologist, because you are not exiting the manic state when you "exit the HADS state".
Nothing you say sounds surprising or exceptional, conditional on you having a manic episode. Look at the list of symptoms on wikipedia, and you're checking off all of them while counting them as evidence that more is going on.
100 IQ average humans have attempted to wipe out 60 IQ average humans. There were programs for mandatory or financially incentivized sterilization of people with down syndrome and other mental disabilities in many western countries, including their mass murder in the holocaust.
As for >140 IQ average humans, remember that these make up little more than 3% of the population of every country. It would be very unstrategic for them to talk about the rest of humanity in an openly antagonistic way. Instead, if they wanted to win eugenics, they would have to make false promises to bring the rest of humanity along while they amass power.
And this still begs the question that those with the money and power to do this would be trying to do eugenics in a way you consider to be right. That they wouldn't outgroup people or aspects of humanity that you care about. That the new subpopulation's memes would be aligned with the rest of humanity.
I asked you to try out avoiding quotation marks. You said I hate you.
I'm guessing that people who "made it" have a bunch of capital that they can use to purchase AI labor under the scenario you outline (i.e., someone gets superintelligence to do what they want).
If the superintelligence is willing to deprive people of goods and services because they lack capital, then why would it be empathetic towards those that have capital? The superintelligence would be a monopsony and monopoly, and could charge any amount for someone existing for an arbitrarily short amount of time. Assuming it even respects property law when it is aligned with its creators.
Is it that the government (or whoever directs superintelligences) is going to kill the rest because of the same reasons we worry about misaligned superintelligences
"Kill" is such a dirty word. Just not grant them the means to sustain themselves.
or that they're going to enrich themselves while the rest starves (but otherwise not consuming all useful resources)? If that's this second scenario you're worrying about, that seems unlikely to me because even as a few parties hit the jackpot, the rest can still deploy the remaining capital they have. Even if they didn't have any capital to purchase AI labor, they would still organize amongst themselves to produce useful things that they need, and they would form a different market until they also get to superintelligence, and in that world, it should happen pretty quickly.
Why would capital owners with a superintelligence ever let those without capital build their own superintelligence? That sounds like a recipe for AI war - are the poors really going to program their superintelligence with anything other than the fundamental rejection of the concept of capital ownership in a post-scarcity society?
The Demon King does not solely attack the Frozen Fortress to profit on prediction markets. The story tells us that the demons engage in regular large-scale attacks, large enough to serve as demon population control. There is no indication that these attacks decreased in size when they were accompanied with market manipulation (and if they did, that would be a win in and of itself).
So the prediction market's counterfactual is not that the Demon King's forces don't attack, but that they attack at an indeterminate time with the same approximate frequency and strength. By letting the Demon King buy and profit from "demon attack on day X" shares, the Circular Citadel learns with decently high probability when these attacks take place and can allocate its resources more effectively. Hire mercenaries on days the probability is above 90%, focus on training and recruitment on days of low-but-typical probability, etc.
This ability to allocate resources more efficiently has value, which is why the Heroine organized the prediction market in the first place. The only thing that doesn't go according to the Heroine's liking is that the Circular Citadel buys that information from the Demon King rather than from 'the invisible hand of the market'.
more generally the Demon King would only do this if the information revealed weren't worth the market cost
The Demon King would sell the information as soon as she thinks it is in her best interests, which is different from it being bad for the Circular Citadel. Especially considering the Circular Citadel doesn't even have to pay the full cost of the information - everyone who bets is also paying.
It is very possible that the Demon King and the Circular Citadel both profit from the prediction market existing, while the demon ground forces and naive prediction market bettors lose.
That's probably the only "military secret" that really matters.
The soldiers guarding the outer wall and the Citadel treasurer that pays their overtime wages would beg to differ.
Psychologically speaking, I wouldn't expect your loathing of trans people to stick after you properly resolved such a big mental knot. If your theories were correct, trans people would be victims of a mental health crisis scarcely more accountable than people with untreated schizophrenia or agoraphobia. Pity, grief, and horror would make more sense than cruelty.
So I don't think you've gotten to the heart of your own emotional matter. There is clearly part of you that loathes your current place in life, but I don't think you've identified what it is yet. My ~70% confidence guess based on this post would be that you feel like you can only be safe if you're socially accepted by loathing/denying yourself, either directly or by letting a group identity subsume yours.
Gender dysphoria and self-loathing can easily reinforce each other, but most trans people I know who experienced self-loathing before transitioning (myself included), the transition process alleviates the dysphoria enough that the self-loathing can be resolved with little or no therapy. I too visited /r/traa and /tttt/ early in my process, but I left those spaces once I felt more comfortable with myself.
I would recommend you go to therapy rather than try to find comfort in the support of others who "understandably have some animosity towards trans people", because if I'm right that would just continue the cycle and get you to another place where you hate yourself. Self-love won't come from being showered with upvotes for being cruel to your past self.