Dwayne Monroe

@cloudquistador.eurosky.social

Cybernetics • AI Resistance • Dialectics • Film Noir • Sun Tzu • https://monroelab.com • vdgasjournal.com • https://www.youtube.com/@DialecticalHouseParty • https://padlet.com/verdigris21/verdigris-kjopwvgquczhyt06

When something seems not to make sense, you can spot it years before. If you see this case here, Kirstie and I spotted something was rotten. bsky.app/profile/oliv...

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ@olivia.science · 4d ago

Thanks for sharing & @jwlockhart.bsky.social for writing. Nice example of entryism & explains the sexism (feminists like said point these out) in the 2010s. See: Whitaker, K. J. & Guest, O. (2020). #bropenscience is broken science. The Psychologist. doi.org/10.5281/zeno... olivia.science/entryism/

I appreciate this shout-out from @fellowesin.bsky.social for two reasons: 1.) It's always nice to have your work acknowledged but more critically.. 2.) It inspires a bit of ruthless self critique What is the Monroelab project for? What is the goal and who is the hoped for audience?

They put this saltwater (Antalya) fish into freshwater (Samsun)@fellowesin.bsky.social · last wk.

Dwayne Monroe!! Writes great essays about genAI and why it sucks monroelab.com He's also on here, @cloudquistador.eurosky.social!!

'Going to Tehran’ has been strongly recommended by Iranian scholar Dr. Seyed Mohammad Marandi. Like all works that state facts without regard for prejudice and illusions, it has been ignored by the usual, melanin challenged suspects… till now. Here is a review: invent-the-future.org/2026/06/goin...

Going to Tehran: the book that predicted this mess in Iran - Invent the Future

In 2013, two former US national security officials – Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann Leverett – published a book called Going to Tehran. In it they argued, on the basis of insider experience, that the...

invent-the-future.org

This is 💯 entryism. He wrote a piece seemingly critical of AI, got caught & admitted to chatGPT use, but also gaslights us it's a search engine & it's useful for checking links — why not just click them? We can't be anti AI if we don't agree we see it. They did it with climate change, tobacco etc.

Holden Thorp@holdenthorp.bsky.social · 3w ago

Hi, this is Holden emerging from my Bluesky hiatus to tell everyone that when checking the links in the piece, I used ChatGPT as my search engine (does anyone use Google anymore?). The piece was written by me and edited by humans. So all the links were checked by me and again by our copyeditors.

Instead of saying 'AI' did this or 'AI' wants that (not only anthropomorphic but a diversion) I suggest we always name companies, products, customers uses and infrastructure. What, precisely is Microsoft, Google, Amazon selling? Who is buying and why? What are the angles?

The same 'logic' is used in UFO circles (and a similar sort of chaotic thinking). The 'U', as we know, stands for 'unidentified but into the breach flow confidently asserted fictions. So it is with 'debates' about so-called 'AI'. Indeed, the 'AI chat space may be a bit worse.

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ@olivia.science · 3w ago

It bothers me when people say "AI is vague therefore X" when the X is anything but saying "ok we're defining it". Not that we have to define it, but we can avoid arguments from ignorance. 1/

Whenever a famous evil person dies, 'nice' people emerge, as if from a suburban cul de sac void of mindlessness, to insist we be nice to the dead. Such people are useless in a fight, such as the war we're in. Ignore them. Pour a glass of something strong over the prostrate form of a foe.

Let's stop calling them 'tech lords', that sounds like a group of high intelligences that observe and control from an orbital palace. They are unwashed ass megalomaniacs whose rise to prominence and power indicts the gangster system (also known as capitalism) that elevated them.

"executives with no understanding of the industry" seems to be an endemic problem across industries: higher education, medicine, you name it, a bunch of suits with MBAs and unearned arrogance are destroying everything around us, and for some reason, we're supposed to accept that they know best

Greg Iwinski@garyjackson.bsky.social · 4w ago

TV writers were right in 2023 and are being proven more right every day — there was a stable television model that made everyone lots of money and put out good shows. Then execs with no understanding of the industry confused the production model and the distribution model, and they blew it all up.