>but you see in communism, they want to stop you from buying so much!
Why is this bad? Consumer culture is cancer. No one needs $500 pants. No one needs $500 Nikes. No one needs to be able to choose between 100 different brands of blue jeans made of the exact same material. Or 100 different brands of corn flake cereal. In the US we have brainwashed ourselves into thinking this stuff is necessary to live when it really isnt. We were turned into retarded cattle that only understands consumption and buying more. Maybe this is bad.

>>82096814 (OP)
>Having millions of options is bad
>I would rather wait a year in the jeans queue for the chance to get some suboptimal shit-quality jeans that the government produced
KEKERRROOOOOOOOOO

>>82096814 (OP)
>>but you see in communism, they want to stop you from buying so much!
That's not what communism is about. Communism aims for a utopian classless society where the state is dissolved and workers own the means of production. Naturally, this vision is completely incompatible with human nature, so it leads to societal degeneration into authoritarianism and enormous amounts of suffering.

>>82096846
This is retarded. The government can easily produce an abundance of jeans for a much cheaper price than Levis.

>>82096855
Explain how a fair society is incompatible with human nature

>>82096814 (OP)
two things are wrong with communism
1. it doesn't take into account the selfishness of the individual
2. it doesn't encourage growing production
capitalism works where communism doesn't because it creates a system that works regardless of how selfless you are and that prioritizes increased production. If we reach a point where the need for more production wanes to almost zero (dropping birth rates indicate we'll reach this point soon) and have truly impartial third parties to govern things (ai is rather ideal for this if it was better) then communism would be better. I think that capitalism works perfectly... till advances in technology and interconnectedness make it more profitable to manipulate and exploit people rather than make more or better product. Late stage capitalism doesn't work, or atleast it dosen't work for 99% of people. We're currently reaching a tipping point in society where capitalism will fail but communism would be ideal.

>>82096814 (OP)
Is pic related how OP felt while writing this? Anyway, most societies aren't struggling enough to want to try something so "radical". Prerevolutionary Russia and China really sucked to live in if you weren't from the ruling class for example. Maybe if things truly get bad in the west, maybe there will be a new wave of Marxism.

>>82096876
>This is retarded. The government can easily produce an abundance of jeans for a much cheaper price than Levis.
KEKKKKKEROOOOOOOOOOOOOOO he doesn't know soviet history KEK

>>82096814 (OP)
Because of the fucking genocides you uneducated retard

>>82096814 (OP)
In communism you gave no freedom but in capitalism you have the freedom to serve the rich.

>>82096876
>Explain how a fair society is incompatible with human nature
What "fair" society? Fair has nothing to do with it. What's incompatible with human nature is this pursuit for a lack of state. That somehow everybody will just get along and be happy-clappy without any systems in place to ensure e.g. public safety, services, or governance. That everyone will just be happy to be a good selfless person in a system without any barriers to ensure symbiosis. Inevitably all such attempts lead to centralization of power, which then easily gets exploited by bad actors. Then as a result you get some of the worst atrocities ever committed in the history of mankind.

>>82096983
just replace the central authority with ai duh

>>82096935
What genocides
The holodomor was a hoax
Mao wasnt genocide it was mismanagement
I dont know what other genocides are you referring to

>You need good quality pants!
>You need good quality shoes!
>You need competition!
>Variety is good!
>Communism doesn't want you to have either, only one! Therefore, communism bad!

Oh look, it's another failures thread.

>>82096814 (OP)
>But you see in communism, they want to stop you from buying so much!

This isn't even necessarily the case. You can still have a market for luxury goods by having different publicly owned corporations or co-ops or whatever else producing different items of the same type. You can have as much choice in your products under communism as people want. There is literally no reason choice has to be eliminated, there is enough labour and resources available to have as many different brands of dragon dildos as we want.

>>82097007
Then it's not communism, because you still have a state. Speaking hypothetically, of course, since AI fundamentally lacks the kind of generalization ability that's required to run a state. Specific AI models are only good at specific kinds of jobs, and such an approach doesn't scale well, since you need a new model for every single task. And the pool of possible tasks is practically infinite.

>>82096814 (OP)
>We were turned into retarded cattle that only understands consumption and buying more.
speak for yourself. having choices is for people capable of agency and autonomy (so not ugly shitskins like you. yes, being attractive means you're much more capable intellectually) and if you want your choices panned out for you then sure, have only a few brands and outsource your thinking to the "higher ups" on what is best. at least in capitalism you see each of them are pretending to be higher ups so you have some intuition not everything advertised is as good as it seems
CAPTION: J0RKJ, as in j0rjking my peanits

>>82097011
ok youre retarded kill yourself

>>82097034
NTA
There are more varieties of communism than just the Marxist Leninist maximalist position and you can still call having a state and money lower phase communism.

>>82097034
if the state isn't human is it still a state? Also all that stuff about the limitations of ai is pretty short sighted

>>82097065
Then you're a revisionist and not a true communist.
>>82097067
>if the state isn't human is it still a state?
Yes. There is a mode of governance, there are rules, there are consequences for misbehavior, etc. It's a state.
>Also all that stuff about the limitations of ai is pretty short sighted
What I told you is a fundamental limitation of machine learning, that applies to any kinds of ML models, not just the deep learning ones. It's a consequence of the fact, that if your input doesn't come from the same distribution as the training data, you have no guarantee of the model's performance. In practice the performance in such cases is extremely poor. If you want to get around it, you'd need to fundamentally change how machine learning works, or devise a completely new AI subfield that relies on completely different premises and mathematical foundations.

>>82096814 (OP)
You see it would be nice if it were about consumerism but communism is not what it is about. Im paraphrasing it here but if you doubt me go find a copy of das kapital; communism is about imposing a collective two class system on individuals then asserting that one class is necessarily subjugating the other and the only way to remediate the conflict is extermination of the controlling class. Even Marx and Engles described what counts as a bourgeois / capitalist class vaguely which is why it makes communism default to despots that slowly broaden the scope of the oppressive class as the economic aspect slowly fails to provide for people and those people start getting fed up. Class theory is what intersectionality is based on, for example its why intersectional feminists say they want to destroy the patriarchy but do things like campaign against coomer games that by and large are made by gay men for gay men, this has no affect on women but needs to be done because The concept of being a man is what needs to be destroyed, men and maleness IS the patriarchy viewed through the lense of class theory. Similarly for intersectional race theory. Rightoids have the hyperbole that (they) want you and your kids dead for being white, and worst part is theyre not wrong and they dont know it. In class theory you can largely say that people who can be labeled as the oppressor class are inherently ontologically evil meaning there is nothing you could do to them that would count as immoral including murder. This is why communism is bad, forces outside individual control can lead to not only limits on individual liberty but to unjust prosecution and death.

>>82096814 (OP)
Hello, i live in a former yugoslav country. Here is why communism does not work in the real world:
1) like the guy at the start of the thread (whom you suspiciously ignored) said, communism does not account for corruption and greed at all. you have a ruling communist party that centralises all power. so if the heads of that party become corrupt, there is nothing keeping them in check. in yugoslavia for example, this meant that instead of the 50 year old guy with 30 years of experience getting the position of factory manager, the 20 year old drooling retard son of a high ranking party member gets the management position due to nepotism. there are no anti corruption systems set in place because everything is ruled by the corrupt party. so the factory fails and nobody is blamed for it, because if you blame the party members, you get sent to a work camp for wrongthink.
Tying into 1 is 2) absolutely no criticism of the ruling party is allowed. the glorious leaders of the party are infallible gods and if you so much as disagree with one of their policies and talk to people around you that "it is a very bad thing that comrade XYZ gave his incompetent son that important position" you instantly get disappeared into the work camp
3) there is no incentive to create. like earlier in the thread you said "the government can easily make a lot of cheap jeans" yes, they can. why would they? what would be the purpose? to make the people happy? lol. the government of communist countries, like governments of capitalist countries, still serves primarily and mostly itself. why would they expend the effort to make jeans if they can just make 1 model of shitty cheap cargo pants. the people dont have a choice. the people cant vote to make jean factories, this isnt a democracy. in yugoslavia and soviet countries, the only way to get jeans, coats, etc was to smuggle them. for example in yugoslavia you would have to go to trieste in italy and smuggle back jeans/sneakers/etc

>>82097123
Brother, no Marxist Leninist party is going to be elected under a capitalist system. the revolution isn't going to result in a classless, stateless, moneyless society. I think a chinese style socialist system is coming next and I am very skeptical that humans will ever abolish the state and achieve "true" communism. But I guess we will see.

>>82097123
anon I think that's anarcho communism is it not? Not pure communism.

>>82097211
Nobody is buying your bullshit, CIA. Fuck off, we all know capitalism is dogshit, even on this absurdly reactionary website. You should be shitting bricks right now, glowie.

>>82097233
i literally came back from harvesting potatoes and see a thread about glorifying the rotten disgusting form of governance my parents and grandparents shed blood to get away from from a person who never had to experience living under it. i would go to war to stop communism like my father did any day of the week. eat shit and die, filthy retarded western nigger. glorifying communism from a fucking multimillion person megacity. die.

>>82096814 (OP)
>No one needs $500 pants. No one needs $500 Nikes. No one needs to be able to choose between 100 different brands of blue jeans made of the exact same material. Or 100 different brands of corn flake cereal
Sure, I can concede that in the US consumer culture is absolutely out of control and that capitalism is a rotten system. However, this does not mean that Communism is the solution.

Communism is a system that fails on its own merits. It drags everyone down to the lowest common denominator and makes that the standard for everyone outside of "The Party," which always seems to form as an oligarchy in spite of communism's supposed goal of ridding their society of classes and wealth disparity. People are by nature going to seek upward mobility and a system that rations everything equally rewards homeless smack addicts the same as neurosurgeons and effectively eliminates any incentive to be better.

This of course, is without mentioning the countless atrocities suffered under communist regimes in the 20th century. Over 100 million civilian deaths can be directly attributed to communist governments through genocide and starvation. The USSR was an awful place to live, especially in the satellite states, and I encourage you to talk to some people that lived back then about the living conditions they suffered.

So communism and capitalism are both cancers, and neither system is good to live under. What is the solution? Well... some call it third positionism.

>>82097123
I genuinely never understand people who think agi can't exist. We know humans aren't conscious through some magical force that's impossible to replicate. If you were to copy, neuron for neuron, a human brain it would work as expected. We simply are struggling to unravel the complexities of that system and there's no reason to believe we couldn't replicate it eventually.

>>82097283
because what you're talking about is the same as talking about other sci fi shit like light speed spaceships and lasers and lightsabers. i'm doing a doctorate in applied matehmatics. do you understand what current AI/deep learning is? it's just basic statistics. just approximation. like the guy above said, if you try to apply a model to anything slightly outside its predicted scope, it's useless. current AI is just shit that was developed in the 80s by mathematicians who understood that feeding large amounts of data into models will make them predict similar data quite well. but there would need to be a civilisation-altering series of massive discoveries in all fields of science to go from "algorithm that optimises prediction with gradient descent on given data" to "sentient self maintaining self developing algorithm"
Just like communism is an imaginary system where everyone is a benevolent deity that never takes more than he needs and will work for... no outside incentive. pure fiction

>>82097325
Nah bro, alchemists and scholars have been working on homunculi for literally millennia.
Look up the I Ching trigram system and the Eight Circuit Model and see if you notice any similarities.
Just whip together an artificial soul DUMMY

>>82097223
>no Marxist Leninist party is going to be elected under a capitalist system
It certainly can be. You got a socialist winning the New York democratic primary, so I don't see why not. It would of course be potentially disastrous for the society, and that's why strong systems should be in place to prevent such actors from causing too much damage in pursuit of their utopian vision.
>I think a chinese style socialist system is coming next
China isn't really even socialist. It has moved away from socialism by privatizing half of its market. It's also authoritarian, which isn't very good.
>I am very skeptical that humans will ever abolish the state and achieve "true" communism
It won't happen, because such a system is inherently incompatible with human nature.
>>82097224
Anarcho-communism Kropotkin-style also posits the dissolution of the state, but where it differs is in its rejection of the transitional state, and instead calls for the immediate formation of specific voluntary decentralized structures. It also offers a vision of what these decentralized societal arrangements should look like, which further differentiates it from Marxism-Leninism.
>>82097283
I'm not saying it can't exist. I'm saying such a thing cannot exist on the current theoretical basis of the dominant branch of artificial intelligence.

>>82097325
anon ai already exists. It's in your brain. We simply need to figure out how it works and replicate it digitally. I don't care how fucking smart you think you are or how the current system of ml fails. A machine (the human brain is just a computer at the end of the day) that thinks already exists.

>>82097283
and to add, your statement is as much conjecture as the argument that humans are conscious through divine providence and God's design. but you most likely want to treat the religious argument as absurd while yours as valid because... ?

>>82097360
religion is not something that has any evidence. Give me one shred of evidence that there is something impossible to reproduce about the human brain. I do not need to assert with evidence that something that has no basis in reality doesn't exist.

>>thing that no one said
>answer for the thing that no one said

>>82096814 (OP)
Because communism requires omnipotent omnipresent totalitarian state to work (why is that read Hayek's Road to Serfdom).
And as soon as this state is established it has zero reason to treat citizens as human beings, but instead treats them as cannon fodder to fuel it's own state goals.

There ilare theoretical naive expectations how things should be and there are practical implementations of things. And real world communism implementations are very bad.

>>82096814 (OP)
>consumer culture sucks
then don't participate in it? no one is forcing you to buy a $500 nike.

>>82097280
>It drags everyone down to the lowest common denominator and makes that the standard for everyone outside of "The Party"
Yea this is Nazism too retard

>>82097374
i am saying that the current modern version of AI has absolutely nothing to do with the human brain or its mechanisms and names like "neural networks" are gimmick names, so retards will say "DURR NEURON NETWARK? DAT MEAN DIS PROGRAM IS LIKE A-A-A REEL HUMON BRAINE!" Neural networks in machine learning are just a system of filters. that's it. So much of it right now isnt even based in theory and is just empricial, eyeballing it, feature engineering "oh if i tweak this constant like this the prediction rate goes up by 2.5%". There is no tony stark marvel bullshit going on behind the scenes. It's just a computer. Stop living in fairy tale land.

>>82096814 (OP)
Because the Russians gave it a bad rap and whenever someone needs to point to why communism is bad they point to the Soviet union. Even though modern russia is now capitalist and sucks even harder people dont point to the Russian federation as thw prime example for why capitalism is bad.

So really its all just word games and propaganda.

>>82097441
again you're ignoring the fact that it IS explicitly possible unless you believe in some magical bs that makes the human brain unreproducable (despite the fact that we literally reproduce through gestation) like that other anon. I don't fucking care about the state of the field today or how much of a lie it is.

>>82096814 (OP)
>Consumer culture is cancer
>he doesn't know about Soviet consumer culture worshiping mundane for west things such as jeans, Czech crystal chandeliers, Marlboro cigarettes, bubble gum, Yugo leather female knee boots and
sheepskin coats. And king of the them all: Lada cars.

>>82096876
>The government can easily produce an abundance of jeans
You have a naive amount of faith in any government. Under capitalism, the factory would be built over the course of many years and be billions over budget after everybody at every level of the project will skim money from the budget in some shape or form.
Communism is the same, but the middle managers wear red ties
t. works in a factory in a former gommunist cunt

>>82097445
>Even though modern russia is now capitalist and sucks even harder people dont point to the Russian federation
In USSR it coste 1-2 salaries to buy jeans and dozens of free time seeking their sellers and set in up meeting.


In today's Russia average workers can unironically buy 20 jeans with one salary over internet and they would be delivered to his door next day.

You know nothing John Snow. Parroting boomers bollocks who thought they had hard fighting USSR. But USSR was so shit and rotten that it felt apart itself. Don't expect it form Russia today, comparing to miserable Soveit citizens Russians today live like kangs.

>>82097484
Hahaha, this guy knows. In Yugoslavia there was a fad of glorifying JFK in the mid-late 60s, i have no idea why. But my grandmother and other old ladies i know had JFK merchandise. My grandma had a ring with JFKs face, some sort of banner-quilt with JFK and marshal Tito shaking hands. And as you said, Marlboro cigarettes, goddamn. My grandma's brother smuggled shit from Italy and Austria since he worked as a truck driver. He would sell the smuggled shit for extra cash. So much marlboro shit. And everyone was itching to buy a pair of smuggled levi's. Consumerism is not capitalism. consumerism is human nature.

>>82097355
>. You got a socialist winning the New York democratic primary,
zohran won on a mostly milquetoast social democratic platform. its a great sign, but he didnt win by saying anything particularly revolutionary

>China isn't really even socialist. It has moved away from socialism by privatizing half of its market. It's also authoritarian, which isn't very good.

i dont think you have been keeping up with china in recent years, they think they will have full socialism achieved within three 5 year plans

>It won't happen, because such a system is inherently incompatible with human nature.
i would like you to look up and read about christopher columbus and the Taino people. the taino people lived an idyllic stateless communist life for thousands of years. there is nothing natural about the state, its just a very useful tool for organizing and distributing resources that can be used for very nefarious purposes under the wrong conditions.

>>82097420
Believe it or not, there was a lot of economic prosperity in WW2 Germany. Plenty of wage disparity too, depending on your job. Many things were socialized, sure, but not everything.

In the same vein as talking to people who lived under the USSR can tell you about how much it sucked, I can tell you some interviews with German citizens revealed that the majority of them even decades after the death of Hitler still thought of it as the best time of their lives.

Unless you can consider the entire native citizenry of a nation the "ruling class" I would say your claim is fallacious. And if you can consider the entire citizenry the ruling class... well that sounds pretty nice to me.

>>82096814 (OP)
Your examples are just more transparent about their meaninglessness and arbitrary nature, but signifiers of status are like this in any sort of system, we just take something dead to represent meaning. It's also nice to be able to rise and compensate if you happen to be ugly for instance.

>>82097514
the 50+ year old yugoslavian who loved his country being destroyed by america and his neighbours thrust into a failed state status or genocided or starved or bombed by america is still here.

>workers have too much power, BOMB ME AMERICA

>>82097441
NTA, but
>the current modern version of AI has absolutely nothing to do with the human brain
A neuron in a neural network is modeled after neurons in the brains of living organisms. So this statement isn't entirely accurate.
>Neural networks in machine learning are just a system of filters.
The input signal is transformed, which can include filtering, but it's not just filtering. Filtering means selecting things from the signal, so e.g. pooling operations, but that's just one of the possible operations.
>So much of it right now isnt even based in theory and is just empricial, eyeballing it
A lot of it is based on theory. E.g. we have theory that tells us "if you do these mathematical operations using the signal to tune the parameters, the system should get better at its task" and "this structure of neurons should be able to approximate any function". But what I think you're trying to refer to here is that once a neural network learns something, the reasoning it operates on is incomprehensible to us, which is a very fair assessment.
>feature engineering
You don't engineer features for a neural network. You let the network learn what's important in the input on its own. You do feature engineering in classical machine learning.
>oh if i tweak this constant like this the prediction rate goes up by 2.5%
I think what you're trying to refer to here is hyperparameter tuning. But it's a separate thing from feature engineering.

I like cars and motorcycles, but I'd have to pay many years' wages just for the privilege of being put on a 12 year waiting list to get either of those

>>82097582
cars are very significantly cheaper in china than they are in america. can the propagandists at least try?

>failure
Socialists succeeded in turning agrarian feudal shitholes full of illiterate peasants into modern industrial powers, they emancipated the common man and woman from backwards conservative beliefs and the cruel landlord class and provided education and healthcare for all the people
I don't see that as a failure

>>82097562
>>82097441
anyway this whole discussion is getting away from the topic of the thread. Assume for a moment, whether you believe in the possiblity if agi or not, that an artificial intelligence woth the capabilities of a human took over control of a communist state. Would that solve the problem?

>>82097589
I am not a burger and China is hardly communist. Look at car ownership in the eastern bloc and see the reality of vehicles under True Communism TM

>>82097560
1) workers had no power in yugoslavia. all the power was in the party's hands, you retard
2) yugoslavia was not destroyed by america, it was destroyed from within by ethnic conflict and any other theories are schizo american rambling. check the videos from the day tito died, literally everyone started crying because they knew that the terrifying leviathan that the party was was the only thing keeping ethnic conflicts in line. yugoslavia dissolved via the first democratic election where croatians and slovenes decied do annex themselves and become independent again and then the serbs chimped out and claimed that everything was actually serbian land and invaded. thats it. so much for brotherhood and unity as the yugoslav credo stated

>>82097613
>ignore the functioning state governed by marxist principles
yeah no. american and european cars are BTFO by BYD cars and BYD are way less expensive. the capitalists are making shit cars and asocialists are making better ones is my point and it is becoming undeniable.

>>82096814 (OP)
Communism and minimalism are not the same.

>>82097515
>they think they will have full socialism achieved within three 5 year plans
I really doubt it. Socialism means having worker-owned means of production, and that would kneecap their growth, because companies would be strongly incentivized to stop taking in more employees, since doing so would necessarily dilute the value of the ownership of that people who are already on board. The only reason why China has experienced massive economic growth is among other things because they allowed for private ownership of means of production.
>the Taino people
Small tribal societies without hierarchies aren't sustainable. I don't even buy that there wasn't hierarchy in such societies, because that's not the type of formation that the human brain is tuned for operating in. They will always be wiped out by larger more organized societies. If you can't prevent those larger more organized societies form forming, then you will always be wiped out. It's simply not compatible with survival. Even highly organized societies like ones based on the Platonic model put forth in The Republic aren't sustainable, because they put a cap on how many people can be a part of them, and such a society will always lose to one that's bigger, which will eventually happen, since you cannot ensure that it won't form.

>>82097650
>governed by marxist principles
Deng would like a word with you

>>82097605
>Would that solve the problem?
No, because there still being a state would mean that it wouldn't be communist. If it's not a stateless society, then it's not communism. That's why I'm saying it's incompatible with human nature. It necessarily cannot exist.

>>82096814 (OP)
OP did you know that in the USSR they had money, and spent huge amounts of money on American Blue Jeans?

>>82097650
Chinese motorcycles are notoriously shit with huge QC problems and are only marginally cheaper than an equivalent Honda, despite 98% of them using bootleg Honda engines

>>82097616
boris yelston was an american puppet and violently couped the USSR which was what was holding the balkans together. when i say america destroyed it, i mean that, because they knew exactly what would happen to the balkans when the USSR fell.

under socialism workers have dramatically more say in their work place than under capitalism, it is by definition true. the workers also made up the party, maybe not as much from your country as from russia, but the party was made up of workers. if you are going to say workers have more rights now than under the USSR, you are just lying. probably because of
>>82097233

>>82097650
>marxist principles
>wage slavery is the norm
shall we bring up labor laws in china?

>>82096814 (OP)
Consumer culture is cancer. But governments that can enforce communism are also cancer. Ultimately, if you just live like a communist while enjoying the economic powers of the west, you will have the most benefits.

>>82097709
post some articles from the last 10 years about labour violations in china
>>82097672
xi would like to have a work with you

>>82096846
That's already all I have.

>>82097741
https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/china-apple-accused-of-violating-labour-laws-as-employees-at-iphone-factory-found-working-100-hours-of-overtime-being-punished-for-not-meeting-targets-incl-co-comments/
literally the first result that showed up on google
>overworked, underpaid, squalid conditions
what a wonderful marxist paradise :')

>>82097708
yeah you obviously dont know what youre talking about lmao, yugoslavia had nothing to do with the USSR since the very beginning, in 1948 tito refused to subject yugoslavia under the USSR like all the other communist european countries, which made the 2 countries have a mini cold war, and yugoslavia purged all soviet spies from its borders in the informbiro purge. then tito created the non aligned movement so he could distance yugoslavia as far as possible from the soviets but from the west as well. lmao. you are talking so much about things you know absolutely nothing about. yugoslavia was falling apart since the early 80s, and tito died in 1980. you are a filthy american retard who is trying to lecture me about my own country, go eat a cheeseburger or something nigger

>>82097777
>unpaid overtime for not meeting targets
Communist quotas are fun aren't they

>>82096814 (OP)
communism is other stuff than that, most of which is based on attacking innocent virtuous people like the bourgeoisie and fascists. there are plenty of other anticonsumerist movements that aren't communist.

>>82097920
>bourgeoisie
>innocent virtuous people

>>82097930
shut the fuck up you aristocratic swine. what a coincidence that communism was always more concerned with going after the middle class than the ruling class and disappeared when israel got created.

>>82096814 (OP)
communism was always a lie told by evil elites to get their foot in the door and then literally work poor people to death with a rifle pointed at their heads.

>>82096814 (OP)
Instead of being retarded cattle having options, you want to be retarded cattle with no options. Truly enlightened, OP!

>>82097969
>middle classes
>not the most fervent aristocratic bootlickers
Oppress me harder daddy uguu~ no not like that!

>>82098029
nigga the middle class started the french revolution that overthrew and killed aristocrats. commies are completely cool with being ruled by aristocrats, read marx. it's only when the middle class gets uppity and tries to challenge the ruling class or overthrow it that communists rise up to reinstate aristocracy.

>>82098052
>nigga the middle class started the french revolution that overthrew and killed aristocrats
And cheered when they got persecuted even harder under the Republic. They don't care whose boot it is, the middle class yearns for the terror and licks hardest of boots

>>82098170
the middle class absolutely did not get persecuted harder under the terror, which was mostly carried out against aristocrats, contras and proto-commies. they were somewhat persecuted under the directory, but they still kept the wealth they gained from the confiscation of aristocrat and church property.
>They don't care whose boot it is, the middle class yearns for the terror and licks hardest of boots
historically, only because they thought it would preserve their privileges and because christianity taught them to serve the upper classes. the ambitious and revolutionary middle class, exemplified by robespierre and napoleon, has always been willing to be the boot and to crush aristocratic tyranny wherever it is found.

>>82097589
>>82097589
>Slave labor
>Shit QC
>Doesn't pass safety standards
>Steals tech from Tesla and other Western brands since China is known for IP theft so don't need to spend money on research departments

I can't see why Chinese cars are so cheap....

itt: economically illiterate, room temp iq runts who think they're entitled to the fruits of other people's labor

sucks to suck pal, i'll keep charging you rent

>>82097650
Only a wumao could post something so stupid.

>>82097930
You do know people like Lenin, Che, Marx, Engels, Castro, Kim, Pol Pot and Mao came from the upper classes right? No different from the larping, Antifa, nepo baby, troons living off Daddy's money.

>>82097506
>Under capitalism, the factory would be built over the course of many years and be billions over budget after everybody at every level of the project will skim money from the budget in some shape or form.
>Communism is the same,
>Communism is the same
>He doesn't know
There was Soviet phenomenon called "dolgostroy", losely can be translated as "over shedule construction". Soviet factories and another institutions construction could drag for 10-20-30 years. It was so bad Soviets officially allowed to pay attention to problem, they published stats (for internal use) that in USA average factory construction time was 3 years when in USSR it was 12 years. Entire USSR was covered with abandoned foundation pits and buildings concrete windowless frameworks. In USSR and post USSR it was very popular hobby of Stalkers (lifting name form the insanely popular Soviet sci Fi novel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roadside_Picnic), people exploring these abandoned ruins, that looked like legacy of alien civilisation. Me personally small kid played such games with buddies, we had huge pit of rough sand left for construction that never happened (this pit stayed at one place for 25 years I kid you not) and construction pit for future kholhoz concrete cow barns, filled with water were played insane game there but this is another story (years after I wonder how did were stayed alive, God protects little kids I guess).

>>82098323
Why did planned economy fail to properly allocate recources and Soviet construction has disbalance of making simple labor tasks like making pits and concrete frames but failing to fit it with engineering communications and industrial machines it's entire esse about communism and planned economy but core reasons come directly form Marxists foundation and labor theory of value basically value is work hours done by worker, I worked pay me I don't care if it was useful! There is vulgar critique of Marxism: "what if some workers with shovels would go around digging holes nobody asked for" would we need to pay them? It is deflected by Marxist as "obvious nonsense". But surprise surprise! USSR literally had such workers going around and digging construction pits and building concrete frames nobody asked for.

>>82096814 (OP)
Communism is such an awful system that nobody has ever been able to complete its implementation. It is so unbelievably shitty that collapse happens long before it is even half complete.

>>82096814 (OP)
Imagine trying to create a very niche product under socialism. Like furry-suits for degenerate furries to have sex parties with. You'd have to convince a government committee to allocate the resources for you to create your furry suit factory. Probably not gonna happen. But maybe you lie, and say it'll be for sports-team mascots. So you get approval, and the funds to do it.

The furries who use fursuits are happy, but there is a problem. Everyone in the community looks at your furry suit factory as something that they are supporting with their tax dollars; something that is competing with food/medicine/school-books and actually popular diversions like sports ball products and tv dramas.

Under liberalism, normies will still despise your furry factory on a moral level. But they won't care too much, cause it's only being supported by the degenerate furriers that buy their products, and the degenerate owners who started the company. Under socialism, they are unwillingly involved with supporting it with their tax dollars.

Now repeat with every product that exists. Every good and service that exists become political. You can never say, "it's a free country, it's none of your business what products I create and consume". Nope. Non-gamers are paying for videogames. Bald people are paying for shampoo. The normal political battles that exist around government funding for healthcare, military, education, welfare, and infrastructure; these political battles now involve every product and service in existence. Look forward to paying for bibles and guns as an atheist who doesn't like guns. Look forward to paying for makeup, tampons, and fake finger-nails as a man. Everything that exists, your tax dollars pay for. Everything is political. Everything is a fight.

>>82096846
except the consumer first dynamic is even newer than 20th century national experiments

>>82097599
>they emancipated the common man and woman from backwards conservative beliefs and the cruel landlord
Fan fact: in 1914 Russian peasants onwed 75% of arable land. What landlords class are you talking about? Stop mindlessly parroting commie propaganda. Russian aristocrats started with 60% land ownership in 1861 and over the year they partied and gambled their birthright to peasants. Free market unironically solved this problem.
And then commies came and confiscated peasants lands in Russia.

>>82097562
>A neuron in a neural network is modeled after neurons in the brains of living organisms
ANNs are nothing like biological neural networks, they don't even learn the same way. Artificial neurons have significantly less capacity, capability, and complexity than natural ones. Saying they're modeled after biological neurons is like saying a squirt gun is modeled after a real gun. This is all ignoring that biological brains aren't just neurons anyway and include a range of support cells like dendrites and chemicals which tune learning rates and firing rates.
>>82096814 (OP)
>No one needs
No one needs anything but people are happier with things than without. The main problem with communism is resource allocation which is most efficient in a bottom up style system like free market capitalism or a mixed economy than a top down style system like communism. If you want to create some kind of bottom up communist system that can scale to the size of a country, it would be fine, but I have no idea how you would do that. All attempts at national level communism thus far have been top down and the most successful attempts have implemented capitalistic reform e.g., China or have been propped up by foreign money e.g., North Korea.

>>82098519
>ANNs are nothing like biological neural networks
Again, they are modeled after natural neurons, and their ensembles provide a function with a generalization ability, which is similar to actual brains. They aren't the same, but you're not at all justified in saying they are nothing alike. That's just being overly melodramatic for no reason. While they lack the extent of the generalization ability of actual brains, neural networks can be much better at specific tasks, and they generalize insanely well within the domains of those tasks.

>>82097233
You're a Soviet, Ivan
That's why you hate the CIA, you're KGB

>>82098374
>Non-gamers are paying for videogames. Bald people are paying for shampoo. The normal political battles that exist around government funding for healthcare, military, education, welfare, and infrastructure; these political battles now involve every product and service in existence. Look forward to paying for bibles and guns as an atheist who doesn't like guns. Look forward to paying for makeup, tampons, and fake finger-nails as a man. Everything that exists, your tax dollars pay for. Everything is political. Everything is a fight.
You just described the status quo of capitalism, except with funding Israel, tax breaks, accounting wizardry and DEI subsidies.

>>82098742
>Again, they are modeled after natural neurons, and their ensembles provide a function with a generalization ability, which is similar to actual brains
Again, they are basically toys compared to real neurons. I'm not saying they can't generalize, but they're clearly significantly less capable or powerful than real neurons. Hot Wheels can "act" like cars, but they aren't actually cars.
>but you're not at all justified in saying they are nothing alike
In what way are they alike other than being capable of learning?
>That's just being overly melodramatic for no reason
I'm not being melodramatic, it's just the truth. ANNs are powerful and capable of learning and generalization, I'm not saying otherwise. They just aren't like biological neurons at all.
>and they generalize insanely well within the domains of those tasks
Until you introduce a little noise lmao. Real neurons are much more robust, learn differently, don't use gradient descent, backprop, etc. Real neurons are hebbian, what ANN uses hebbian dynamics outside of some toy networks that can't do shit for fuck?

I'm not the other guy btw just in case you thought I was

>>82098794
Retard, you fucking agree with me, you just took offense for some reason to drawing an obvious and historically documented parallel between the two (the building block of one served as an inspiration for the building block of the other, both posses generalization abilities), and instead you doubled down on trying to insist that they are nothing alike, which you're now contradicting yourself. It's just arguing to argue.
>Until you introduce a little noise lmao
Neural networks are very good at dealing with noise, and that's a component of generalizing well. That's one of the reasons why they are so useful. You're just wrong. And you're still trying to point out how they aren't the same, but nobody was claiming they are the same, you fucking retard.

>>82098869
>that they are nothing alike
You think bicycles are the same as motorcycles? Saying artificial neurons are modeled after real neurons is just wrong. They aren't, they're modeled after a simplistic (and wrong) idea of how real neurons work.
>Neural networks are very good at dealing with noise
Uh, no. That's like, the main reason neuromorphic computing and temporal coding is being funded right now lmao. You introduce single bad pixels into a vision model and fuck its output to hell. One of us might be retarded but it ain't me.

>>82098788
none of those political battles you mentioned end. You just add a bunch more things; and the battles you mentioned get less focus from critics who become distracted by a million more issues.

>>82098989
>You think bicycles are the same as motorcycles?
Retard, you said they are nothing alike. I'm the one telling you they are, and you're the one stuck telling me that "no, no. No similarities here at all".
>Uh, no. That's like, the main reason neuromorphic computing and temporal coding is being funded right now lmao. You introduce single bad pixels into a vision model and fuck its output to hell. One of us might be retarded but it ain't me.
Nigger, you have ZERO fucking idea what you're talking about. That's not how any ML models work, not just neural networks. And if they do, then you overfit your model to hell. The idea behind machine learning was to help solve difficult tasks that classical programming approaches (consisting of long lists of rules) weren't able to solve reliably, because they were very sensitive to noise, among other things. Vision models have ZERO issue dealing with "single bad pixels", you fucking retard. Noise is often times even injected into the training data to improve generalization ability. What modern models have issues with is that they are tightly confined to working well with data that comes from their training distribution, which is a fundamental problem in machine learning, and which is the biggest obstacle towards AGI.

>>82099092
>Retard, you said they are nothing alike
The way they work is completely different. I mean yes obviously you can draw comparisons but I think most people would agree that saying humans and cockroaches are nothing alike is justified hyperbole despite them sharing many of the same functions and abilities.
>Nigger, you have ZERO fucking idea what you're talking about. That's not how any ML models work, not just neural networks
That is how they work lmao, adversarial pixels attacks are a known problem what the fuck?
>Vision models have ZERO issue dealing with "single bad pixels"
So you're one of those ML "enthusiasts" huh? ChatGPT is pretty neat right? Wowie wow wow so cool it says the words and sounds so smart!
>which is the biggest obstacle towards AGI
And somehow a cockroach can outperform human made models, I wonder why? I wonder if maybe biological neurons are just strictly superior to navigating the world even with training data deficits? AGI isn't going to come out of more data or better data, it's going to come out of better (and different) hardware and fusing the software side into the hardware side in such a way that learning can affect the hardware just as it works in biological intelligence.

>>82096814 (OP)
Its a trick by jews to become the ruling class and torment and kill goyim for the rest of time.

Why are you even asking this? You do not care, nothing will convince you that communism is not the best thing since sliced bread. Past examples of communism are not real communism, and every other example of society is capitalism.

>>82096814 (OP)
>I dont see why communism is evil
Then try and read this.

>we were brainwashed in america...
>...so we need to brainwash ourselves in the other direction!

amerislimes are a uniquely subhuman race, aren't they?

>>82099176
>The way they work is completely different.
You're baiting at this point. I refuse to believe someone can be this fucking retarded. Quadrupling down because your ego doesn't allow you to accept that you were wrong and acting overly melodramatic. So let me repeat: you're just fucking wrong. They aren't the same, but the way they process signal is similar, damping it and suddenly increasing in strength as the strength of the input signal increases. Introducing nonlinearity to the function. This description of the basic functionality holds true for both artificial and natural neurons, and which is their fundamental mechanism. Saying that somehow this comparison is analogous to humans vs cockroaches is laughably dishonest.
>That is how they work lmao, adversarial pixels attacks are a known problem what the fuck?
Let me rephrase. You can have adversarial attacks for neural networks which involve the manipulation of the input image in a specific way to fool a model, but it's not something that works universally and generally models are very good at dealing with noise. Your example of just altering a single pixel in an image resulting in e.g. a misclassification is again, laughably dishonest. If your model generalizes this poorly, then I'm not convinced it would even perform well on any representative test set. That's something any decent model that generalizes well would have ZERO issues with.
>So you're one of those ML "enthusiasts" huh?
I have a degree in it and coauthored published papers. But then decided it's unfulfilling and went to law school.
>AGI isn't going to come out of more data or better data
We can agree on that.

>Textless posts are not allowed.
ok

>>82099376
>way they process signal is similar
But it's fucking not! Bio neurons are temporally coded, they have refractory periods which artificial neurons do not, and they use hebbian dynamics to control connections. Artificial neurons don't even "damp" signals or increase in strength like, what do you think ReLU is doing lmao. ANNs are smooth like your brain. You actually aren't describing traditional neural nets at all, you're describing SNNs which is not what is generally used for anything at this point.
>generally models are very good at dealing with noise
*noise they've encountered before
Bio brains can deal with out of distribution noise
>If your model generalizes this poorly, then I'm not convinced it would even perform well on any representative test set
Don't LLMs still have poison tokens?
>I have a degree in it and coauthored published papers
And I am a dog who taught itself to use a computer
>We can agree on that
Well at least there's that

>>82098374
I'll bite. Nobody will get mad at fursuit factories because they are getting their own commodity of choice as well. Nobody gives a shit because it will be a good deal: you will only work a socially necessary amount of labour yet everybody gets what they need. Moralists want to object? Get fucked. Don't work in a fursuit factory.

>>82099467
>But it's fucking not!
Again, they aren't the same, they work on the basis of the same principle. I keep repeating this to you, and you keep going "uh, but this and this is different! See?" as if that was at all relevant to your batshit claim that there is no similarities at all. Just shut the fuck up. And the strength of a "connection" can also be amplified or dampened in a neural network, depending on how it affects the error.
>Artificial neurons don't even "damp" signals or increase in strength
You're dead wrong. That's the whole point behind the neural parameters. Stronger activation values (negative or positive) means more significant. By analyzing them in the starting layers we can actually get some crude idea what a network chooses to prioritize.
>what do you think ReLU is doing lmao
ReLU zeros negative signal, effectively killing the gradient, and preventing the parameters from being altered. So yes, it "dampens" specific signal. But it's not the only type of activation function. E.g. sigmoid closely approximates the activation pattern in a real neuron.
>You actually aren't describing traditional neural nets at all, you're describing SNNs which is not what is generally used for anything at this point.
The way I described a neuron works is the same in ANY neural network. Again, you have zero idea what you're talking about. So shut the fuck up.
>Don't LLMs still have poison tokens?
What does that have to do with your previous completely wrong assertion that neural networks are not resistant to noise? You were wrong, accept that instead of trying to pivot.
>And I am a dog who taught itself to use a computer
A dog would be less retarded, you fucking moron.

>Communism bad, because Russia failed at it.
OK. Russia still sucks under capitalism, does that mean capitalism is bad too?
>processing circle.gif

I'm not saying it's some brilliant solution, but the fact that it was tried by one of the world's worst regimes doesn't mean that all of their pitiful mistakes are inherit in communism. If we're talking about communism's successes then factually we must count the labor union movement of the United States from 1890-1930. Their protests, sit-ins, and literal wars with the owning class led to labor rights and electing FDR. An entire generation went from abject poverty to home ownership and taking legally mandated vacations.

>yeah but the capitalist system...
Fought it tooth and nail and still does. Capitalism does not want you to be content, you will work less and generate a lower bottom line if you are happy. Capitalism wants you in debt, working for no reason but to struggle indefinitely while never building wealth for yourself.

yfud bzizly wfddyxio vznxjhem oewo ptkkeh lyppc zqnxn lfmmdrgk qvkjb

>>82099621
maybe you're describing a co-op, which already exists under liberalism. Under socialism, the moralists who object are paying taxes that support the creation, and maybe even the operations of the fursuit factory. They will vote to shut down your fursuit factory, in favor of a factory that makes extra large soda cups. Majority rules.

>>82099754
>they work on the basis of the same principle
Ok maybe we're talking past each other. I don't see it as the principle because it what is happening network wide is fundamentally different. They each learn, yes. That's similar, but the method of learning is different network wide.
>sigmoid closely approximates the activation pattern in a real neuron
But, it doesn't. Sigmoid is in [0,1] real neurons are just 0,1 and operate temporally and the firing rate is the signal. Sigmoid is smooth within [0,1], real neurons are not smooth at all. Virtually every activation function is smooth in ANNs.
>The way I described a neuron works is the same in ANY neural network
There is no "sudden increase in strength" and they don't "dampen" it prior to "sudden[ly] increas[ing] in strength". They have connection weights to determine all that. Real neurons are hebbian which is closer to what you're describing.
>What does that have to do with your previous completely wrong assertion that neural networks are not resistant to noise?
Oh sorry I guess failing to deal with noise means they're resistant to noise lmao
>A dog would be less retarded, you fucking moron
Not my fault you don't know how neurons work

>>82097014
Stop it, the goyim are going to know!!!! Oy vey it's no good, no good!!!

>>82097545
GIGAKEK
War economy, fool. Also, towed wood gas generators - that sure is some good economic prosperity

>>82097560
Born in the yUgoSlavuA

>>82099893
>Ok maybe we're talking past each other. I don't see it as the principle because it what is happening network wide is fundamentally different.
Yes, the network is different. Yes, the arrangements are different. But you're looking at it at the wrong level of analysis. We're talking about the neurons. And the way they work is similar, one is modeled after the other. That's all I'm saying, but you took umbrage with it for some reason.
>But, it doesn't. Sigmoid is in [0,1] real neurons are just 0,1
False, the output signal in a natural neuron isn't binary. A single firing is binary, but that's not the signal, the signal is the firing rate, which is better modeled as continuous, and is one of the reasons why it's continuous in artificial neurons, besides the fact that it also makes it differentiable.
>Virtually every activation function is smooth
ReLU isn't smooth. The function doesn't need to be perfectly smooth, but you need to account for the values for which it's not differentiable.
>They have connection weights to determine all that.
Those weights affect the signal, and can either amplify it or dampen it. When you have a basic formula like this: W_n*Z_n + b_n, what else do you think W_n does? It's a learnable parameter that affects the strength of the signal.
>Oh sorry I guess failing to deal with noise means they're resistant to noise lmao
The level of robustness depends on the network. But a well trained network IS resistant to noise. Your assertion that they aren't at all, and that altering even a single pixel could fool one is wrong. You then tried to justify it by claiming that adversarial attacks exist, which is equivocating and being dishonest. The same shit you tried to pull when trying to defend that artificial and natural neurons aren't at all similar by presenting "evidence" that they aren't the same, which is a different fucking claim.

>>82100196
>False, the output signal in a natural neuron isn't binary
I said they're temporally coded at least a few times, but the sigmoid function doesn't approximate temporal coding
>the signal is the firing rate, which is better modeled as continuous
The firing rate through time, but it's not how it works in ANNs. SNNs usually approximate the dynamic because it's not efficient on regular hardware. There's also the matter of sparsity, neuron specific memory storage via epigenetics, etc.
>ReLU isn't smooth
It's certainly not a step function, it's smooth after a point.
>Your assertion that they aren't at all
Compared to bio neurons. They're more resistant than a tree or a short series of if statements, sure.
> You then tried to justify it by claiming that adversarial attacks exist, which is equivocating and being dishonest
They're much more susceptible to adversarial attacks than bio neurons which would seem to indicate less robustness to noise, no?
>that they aren't the same
But they aren't! A single bio neuron can learn much more rapidly and efficiently, and have more capacity, than a single artificial neuron. A cell, a non-neuronal cell, has learning capacity as well, do you want to class non-neuronal cells in with bio neurons and artificial neurons? It's ridiculous.

>>82100394
>I said they're temporally coded at least a few times, but the sigmoid function doesn't approximate temporal coding
Again, this is tangential. It doesn't fucking matter that it's not the exact same, you claimed that they are not at all similar, which is false. One models the other, it doesn't mean that it works the exact same, it employs abstraction to achieve the same desired basic functionality.
>The firing rate through time
Oh my fucking god
>It's certainly not a step function, it's smooth after a point.
It doesn't need to be smooth, as long as it's differentiable, and you handle explicitly the points at which it's not.
>Compared to bio neurons
That's a different claim. And your brain is also perfectly susceptible to being fooled by noise. Inject a large quantity of noise into a picture, and voilla, you won't be able to tell what it was originally. But you can train a neural network to be able to recognize what it was originally, and it will beat any human at it.
>They're much more susceptible to adversarial attacks than bio neurons which would seem to indicate less robustness to noise, no?
There's plenty of tailored illusions that can trick your brain. Ranging from simple ones that just trick your senses to more invasive ones that alter the chemistry of your brain. What's remarkable about the brain isn't its resistance to noise. Neural networks are also resistant to noise. It is its generalization ability. You can show a child a green apple, tell them that it's an apple, and they will be able to accurately guess that some other object is also an apple, even if they have somewhat different shapes, are viewed at different angles, have different colors, etc. A neural network can't learn that with this little training data. You have the so-called few-shot learning methods, but their performance is nowhere near that level in analogous scenarios. That's the big differentiating factor.

>>82100754
>One models the other
ANNs don't model temporal coding except for some niche SNNs. Temporal coding is a completely dynamic.
>as long as it's differentiable
And bio neurons don't have differentiable spike trains, do they?
>Inject a large quantity of noise into a picture, and voilla, you won't be able to tell what it was originally. But you can train a neural network to be able to recognize what it was originally, and it will beat any human at it.
Are you seriously arguing that ANNs are MORE robust to noise than biological brains?
>to more invasive ones that alter the chemistry of your brain
Giving someone LSD is more like going into an ANN and forcing neurons to activate, I wouldn't call that an adversarial attack or group it in with noise robustness.
>A neural network can't learn that with this little training data
Right, and neural nets are very bad with handling completely unseen data e.g., figuring out that an orange is also a type of food when it was only trained on apples whereas bio brains can do that instantly because bio neurons are significantly more complex than artificial ones.

>>82096814 (OP)
because central planning is too slow to keep up with what people need or what they are capable of, so all you end up with is capitalism but with social status instead of money.

also because the fundamental argument of communism is that the person who has more exploits the person who has less. but this doesn't just apply to capital, it applies to physical strength, age, gender, wisdom, etc., which makes people resent each other in general based on the fundamental philosophy, and leads to very low trust society

>>82100808
>ANNs don't model temporal coding
Again, that's fucking tangential. Timing of spikes is approximated via discrete steps. It's a model of it, meaning it's not the exact same. It's an abstraction meant to capture the essence of temporal coding. But again, it's not fucking relevant. Listen faggot, we're going in circles. I demonstrated to you the similarities and principles upon which both types of neurons rely, but you just keep going "but this other thing is different!", which is irrelevant to the discussed claim. But you're completely unable to accept that, because equivocating is the only thing you have.
>Are you seriously arguing that ANNs are MORE robust to noise than biological brains?
They handle noise SIGNIFICANTLY better than humans at specific tasks they are built for. The scenario I outlined for you is a perfect example. It's also why a network sometimes can glean correct information from data, and it's puzzling to us why, because to us it shouldn't be possible. Like a recommender system figuring out a girl is pregnant before she does, and serving her ads of baby accessories.

>>82101027
>Timing of spikes is approximated via discrete steps. It's a model of it, meaning it's not the exact same
But it's significantly worse
>It's an abstraction meant to capture the essence of temporal coding
But it doesn't do that at all.
>I demonstrated to you the similarities and principles upon which both types of neurons rely
You demonstrated that bikes and motorbikes are similar and I agree to that extent but no one who wants a motorbike is going to get a bicycle.
>They handle noise SIGNIFICANTLY better than humans at specific tasks they are built for
Yeah ok if you train a model to do one little specific thing it outperforms a human, but wasn't the primary topic prior to all this AGI? AGI isn't a not-hotdog vision model lol.
>Like a recommender system figuring out a girl is pregnant before she does, and serving her ads of baby accessories
I'm certain you can do that with a fully interpretable tree model

>>82101076
Do you always just argue to argue? You conceded the following:
>artificial neurons are in fact similar to natural neurons
Which was the central point, and one which started this whole pointless exchange. Outside of that you also conceded, that:
>neural networks are indeed robust to noise
>neural network outperform humans are are more robust to noise than them at specific tasks
Which I don't even know why you brought up, because it was tangential to the central point, but which you conceded nonetheless, which makes me wonder what the point of contesting them even was in the first place.
>I'm certain you can do that with a fully interpretable tree model
You'd be wrong, because interpretability of models tends to be inversely correlated with their performance, but go ahead. If you make e.g. a decision tree that's comparable in terms of performance to deep learning solutions for recommender systems, than you can not only write a whole PhD thesis on it, but if you publish a paper, then get ready for serious academic recognition.