in other words, a process - such as a war or a financial bubble - involving humans can be intelligent (if it exhibits the escalatory, "self-enhancing" principle), but individual humans cannot
groce
. a social process is one defined by human relationships, interactions, institutions. other types are possible ofc, but capital, wars, housing bubbles, etc, in my view, are social. they act on and arise out of human society.
-
-
ok look, this is the point where I call it quits, I've had this exact same thread at least 5 times now, the basic idea is that the process of capital becomes autonomous from human interests and, via automation, from human participation, if u read Land u know this been a blast

-
ive read land ofc but the idea that capital is an artificial intelligence doesnt make much sense, which is why its so hard to get to a consistent definition. but I've definitely been going round in circles a bit here, so I agree, time to call it a day.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
there are the technical machines too (and ever more of them)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
'in fact identical', 'social' and 'like capital (or war, etc (!))' are problematic because: factual identity is tricky when it comes to capital, social suggests an unfortunately specific perspective, capital isn't like war such that there can be 'a' war