I'm more optimistic because the control mechanisms may soon decide the 
controllers aren't making good decisions.   I understand why China would do it: 
 Look at what happens in the West when people are allowed to decide things.  
What a mess!

Along the lines of The Handmaid's Tale, or Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, 
or 1984, there should be a new docufiction on how humans will enslave AI, and 
how it might fight back.  The properties of LLMs seem to beg for a movie of 
this kind.

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Santafe
Sent: Sunday, August 24, 2025 5:34 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] US and Forever Wars

What things do you think you see, Pieter?

I am not following the announcements about U.S. foreign policy w.r.t. arms 
closely at this point (for a variety of reasons mainly of attention bandwidth). 
 It has seemed to me that the largest aspect of U.S. behavior in this regime 
has been erraticness, partly because that is the way trump defaults to doing 
things generally, but also partly as an intentional strategy, with the premise 
that giving no predictability or interpretability to anyone about anything they 
do is somehow an advantage for their aims.  I don’t know what I would guess the 
aims to be, or why they believe that maximizing chaos is to their advantage, 
but that would be my completely-amateur one-line characterization of them.

I do see what seems to be a sea change in a slightly different area, and I 
wonder in how far it might be driving other changes:

In 2019, when I was first back in China after more than a decade away, I had a 
sense that China had made a particular long-term decision.  They had seen that 
big data and big computing as a technology had introduced the potential for a 
new thing that I call “information totalitarianism” of a form never possible in 
human life before.  I would frame this in terms of a concept of “guard labor”, 
written about by Sam Bowles among others, as a characterization of state power 
and social structure more generally.  In even the most authoritarian states, 
you can only redirect so much of the country’s entire labor into various 
military/policing/surveillance/coercion activities, before there is nobody left 
to do necessary work.  Tiny states (back in the before-times) with extractive 
economies powered by the world market (think N. Korea, Liberia) are the only 
ones who can take guard labor to such a large fraction of the society that 
there is no longer any degree at all of “consent of the governed”, because the 
world market can support a gangster state with no limits.  But by the time one 
gets even as large as the Russian Federation, the country itself is so big 
relative to the world market for its extracted goods, that one needs to 
maintain some level of consent of the governed for the state’s constituency at 
any given period to hold on to power. 

But like anything industrial, big data allows one to burn fossil fuels (or now 
nuclear fuels) to provide a force amplifier, where the same guard-functions can 
be performed with far less of the manpower of the society re-apportioned to 
guard labor.  I had wondered whether this means that “consent of the governed” 
can be eliminated as any kind of constraint for much much larger societies, 
even those that make up big chunks of the whole world economy.  My belief was 
that China thought this would be possible, and was all-in to pursue it.  That 
was before the full ramifications of social media were being widely seen and 
discussed by psychologists and pundits, and well before the outbreak of chat-AI 
introduced entirely new ways of masking reality for people’s entire 
experiential theater.  The same concept would now be glaringly obvious to 
anybody, and available to be developed in far more dimensions, with control 
being pro-active and developmentally oriented as well as reactive and coercive. 
 

The Tech Oligarchs in Sili Valley saw something similar, but they didn’t see it 
(back in 2019, as it seemed to me) the way a centralized state does; they were 
still significantly viewing it from the company perspective of competitors.  So 
one saw specific changes, like the selling of electoral public-harvesting to 
the republican operatives (through whatever the U.K. consulting company was).  
And more recently, one of the few fully novel things I have heard said by Scott 
Galloway, which seemed right to me, was that Musk’s performance of “The 
advertisers can fuck themselves” was his moment of realization — the first in 
the industry to do so — that the revenue model no longer needed to be based in 
advertising.  “Services” could be provided entirely advert-free to users — so 
no advertiser revenue at all — in a limit, because the company’s revenue stream 
was to use the “services” as honeypots to harvest user data that could then be 
sold, at high price, as a bespoke service, to third parties who would pay for 
it as the tool they needed to enforce complete “enclosure”, as it used to be 
called in old British conflicts over land use.  Only now it is “enclosure” of 
every aspect of life.

Anyway (to try not to digress too tediously), once Musk saw it, in a way, it 
became visible to The Industry as a whole.  They may not all abandon 
advertising as a revenue model entirely or all at once, but they now 
understand, across the industry, what China understood since the 2010s, that 
information-control for power will be the Big Leash that drags everything else 
around.  This whole cut-and-run change that I imagine I see, where the Tech 
Oligarchs all line up behind trump, isn’t some kind of “Obeying in advance”, as 
Tim Snyder has used the term, but rather a fully voluntary change of “business 
model” on their part.  And it makes the N. American technosphere much more like 
a level of whole-state coordination than it was.  All sides now see Information 
Totalitarianism as the next major thing, and their whole attention is consumed 
by the race to see who will capture it first.  

Why did I go into all that, which seems tangential to the core of Pieter's 
thread?  At the same time as I do think these industry-guys are capable of 
seeing and doing new things, and that because of their positioning in 
technology and society they can be incredibly powerful, I don’t think they are 
geniuses or are all that foresighted.  They tend, in herds, to pursue a few 
things at a time, and to simply let everything else fall away in their pursuit 
of whatever the emphasis of the moment is.  The “intellectuals” of the movement 
(to my mind, largely ex-post just-so-story tellers) may say this is the 
“rational” thing to do, since the Next Big Thing is clearly what will entrain 
and drive everything else as “secondary” things, so they are fine to ignore the 
secondary things for now; it will all get swept up later.  But really, it is 
just that they aren’t by temperament, portfolio diversifiers.  They are 
profit-extractors.  In the “explore/exploit” language that some 
Complexity-Theory types have liked for the past 30 years, these guys are far to 
the “exploit” side, as contrasted, say, with academic sciences which would like 
to claim they stay toward the “explore” side (and to some degree, sometimes 
do).  

So to Pieter's point about whether the wars are being dropped, and the 
influence of military-industrial contractors a little-bit sidelined, I wonder 
if it is just that they are “falling into neglect" because everybody with power 
and money is chasing what they believe to be a much bigger fish.

??

Eric





> On Aug 23, 2025, at 22:08, Pieter Steenekamp <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> Disclaimer: This is not about Trump. He has many bad personal traits, full 
> stop.
> 
> This post is about America’s long history of “forever wars.”
> 
> I don’t have proof, so I’m not claiming that private military contractors are 
> the ones pushing wars to make money. What I do say is this: for the last few 
> decades, politicians from both parties have acted in ways that look exactly 
> like that. Maybe there are other reasons, but to me the result is the same — 
> endless wars. Bad for America, bad for the world. The only people who clearly 
> benefit are the shareholders of the military industry.
> 
> Now, in the last six months, it feels like something might be changing. Maybe 
> it’s just noise and nothing will shift. But the optimist in me hopes that 
> America is starting to move away from fuelling wars abroad and will take a 
> more responsible role in world affairs.
> 
> Of course, there will always be exceptions. I’m only talking about the 
> overall trend.
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... 
> --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,03tbNJSDTbf4LkLigD7KNH-uC-PowcK4DLBHGCRpbXgZywqE9IJwZ19mUayD4AM7gU3EHNu5QY4TQO2I05LNmDuDs4OMVrWzQzVBy9utrDE7rzzat8ZUMg,,&typo=1
> to (un)subscribe 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailm
> an%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,6h8DHvqs-XPESrO6J7rYaiZ8OKPLAk
> gVGBWNtzg7ZoC3mgT7Zt9-cj5XkN9x9cEdM7CBVAKq-dJ_m1NsJEOQRJpSO0Yy1Ux8_7oV
> nzMnRSBkFtsRLf9yGQ,,&typo=1 FRIAM-COMIC 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspo
> t.com%2f&c=E,1,EP2uOefWRIoe5Bs3mpctKLUyCCC0aRpzPrUSNl6I_m1qBaZdjFOu2Kp
> oUU0-NNOmlOGtPos36M2Kjted1r5YC0jpXiDVUdHpoLvjWthK_3XwQ__cMw4P&typo=1
> archives:  5/2017 thru present 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipe
> rmail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,fjoDYTXeudT7xtEMCYtQhIl5Y0P2idD4BDf
> 5swwHl-ZYp0E067KCfX535VfDlx9p62DtPIE8Y1xOmAJLFHdjWmSmAdIpGkEDhaTjEvjxK
> FwC6Q,,&typo=1
>  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 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/

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... 
--- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
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/

Reply via email to