Questionable Content XIX: Give Jeph Just A *Little* Credit, Here

[Ionathus]

I've explained repeatedly that it's not the content and I'm not offended by it, but that I wonder how Jeph can be very careful around most delicate subjects - he never makes jokes about gay people, or trans people, or people of colour, no matter how gentle, obviously playful or self-referential they could be - but still thinks that 'slightly less physical' domestic violence is funny enough to replace actual domestic violence as a punchline.

It's not offense I'm experiencing; it's confusion at how he can be so considerate and also so short-sighted.

Eh, awareness of sensitive topics never grows at a constant rate across all topics. Just because someone’s really plugged into one topic and the discourse around it doesn’t mean they always have strong understanding of the surrounding topics.

Especially when it comes to casual violence, which is pretty omnipresent in modern media, it’s not exactly shocking when something gets misjudged, regardless of the person’s other opinions.

Watch enough Tom & Jerry growing up and the “violence = comedy” correlation can lurk in the back of your mind for ages until you reach for it without thinking to make a punchline.

[Cikomyr2]

I've explained repeatedly that it's not the content and I'm not offended by it, but that I wonder how Jeph can be very careful around most delicate subjects - he never makes jokes about gay people, or trans people, or people of colour, no matter how gentle, obviously playful or self-referential they could be - but still thinks that 'slightly less physical' domestic violence is funny enough to replace actual domestic violence as a punchline.

It's not offense I'm experiencing; it's confusion at how he can be so considerate and also so short-sighted.

Because you make a common assumption that just become someone is well informed and cognizant of one topic, then they should also be informed and cognizant of EVERY OTHER topics and you put on them unrealistic expectations?

Theres a reason RoseTwitter is a cesspool of denouncements and morality witch burning. People dont seem to realize human beings are not binary individuals (Woke or Not). Some people will just not have encountered a situation that have them re-assess their assumptions, and then when encountering that kind of situation and DOING EVERYTHING THEY HAD TO TO CORRECT THE SITUATION you still criticize them for not being a perfect human being with perfect knowledge of all social issue.

Because that's the standard you are putting on Jeph. "Well he should have known" is a ****ty thing to say to someone who acknowledged that - yes they should have but they didn't. We cant exactly travel back in time now do we?

[VoxRationis]

And I do wonder if he had a different joke, but had to quickly throw in something else after the recent OceanGate submarine thing. I know that people being eaten by sea creatures is a running gag in QC, but the timing isn't ideal and Jeph has never been so callous or malicious as to 'capitalise' on tragedies.

I mean, significant sections of the Internet don't actually interpret that particular event as a tragedy, and I'm guessing that those sections are the ones the author is most exposed to, so it might not strike him as malicious.

[Rodin]

For other webcomic authors I’d assume they had a buffer then had to rewrite due to current events. I don’t think Jeph has a buffer, and certainly not one extending more than a week to cause him to rewrite something.

The joke reads like a dorky joke that’s pretty common in QC. And the punchline isn’t even the joke, it’s Bubbles being irked that a joke she thought was clever didn’t get a laugh.

[Ionathus]

I mean, significant sections of the Internet don't actually interpret that particular event as a tragedy, and I'm guessing that those sections are the ones the author is most exposed to, so it might not strike him as malicious.

I also don't recall many times where QC has been malicious, even about IRL people Jeph hates. He might rant in the caption or down in the below-comic rant section, but the comic itself is rarely mean-spirited -- at the most, it seems to complain about broad circumstances or, like, capitalism as a concept.

[Delicious Taffy]

or, like, capitalism as a concept.

In the author's defense, capitalism is a pain. For starters, it only uses two vowels, which makes it hard to read and say without sounding like another word. I always hear it pronounced like "capita, lizzum" with a weird pause in the middle, for another thing. It's also a massively overused word, to the point it seems to come up in every single conversation, so even without touching on why that might be (which I won't), it gets repetitive. Once somebody starts saying it, I have to wait for them to finish saying it, and that might not sound like a long wait but it's still excruciating, same as all those phrases people puke out of their maws without stopping to breathe, like "hair of the dog" or "shot from behind execution style" or "please stop shouting at my daughter's stuffed animals". Okay, that last one is probably good advice. Stuffies can't argue back, so you'd start to feel bad about laying into them.


What was the thread about, again? [A small voice whispers unintelligibly off-camera] Oh yeah, Questin Jequbect. I like Bubbles, shes tall and metally.

[Mechalich]

Somewhat more seriously, technological change offers challenges to the extant construction of capitalism, and QC certainly presents more than enough technological change, in a decidedly compact timeframe, for there to be serious disruptions compared to the baseline condition of the early-2000s (while the exact amount of time that has lapsed in-universe is unclear, it's been less than ten years, plausibly QC is running at around 1/4-1/3 of real time). This makes at least some discussion of changes from a business-as-usual scenario not only appropriate, but necessary. For example, today's comic openly states that the existence of AIs has transformed how certain critical infrastructure operates, to the point that AIs - assuming they were able to act collectively, which based on everything we've seen of QC AIs is even less likely than for humans - could functionally shut down industrial society at any time. Even individual AIs may have considerable power, such as the once-referenced 'nuclear power plant AIs' since turning off a nuclear power plant has regional-level consequences.

If anything, QC doesn't talk about this nearly enough, even with regard to things that directly impact the characters. For example, AIs are having some kind of impact on the Northampton housing market, but we don't know the scale of that because we have no idea how many AIs there are, nor do we have any sense of the direction this impact is running.

[georgie_leech]

I'm gonna posit that any societal exploration QC does is gonna be more in the same vein that Futurama is basically set in the 21'st century but with robots and talking heads: it's a lot easier to write jokes and commentary in a world that is functionally ours even if realistically it couldn't possibly function like that. That is, I'd expect significantly more "capitalism sucks amirite?" than a thorough exploration of how any given economic system reacts to fundamentally world-shifting developments, and at most we'll get a knowing wink at how ridiculous the set up is.

[VoxRationis]

We see in this strip a piece of established lore linking in well (I suspect by accident) to the crux of a current strip. People on this thread (myself included) have commonly made the complaint that the robots in QC are far too human, barring a tendency towards absurd mental or emotional dysfunctionality. Here, though, this remaining inhuman aspect of AI psychology affirms what Bubbles is asserting: that she, speaking for a dominant thread in robot philosophical or political thought, commits to the principle of prioritizing abstract morality over in-group-preservation. She then says that to do otherwise is a "mistake" that humanity has committed.

If we are to accept the comic's unstated premise that Bubbles is truthfully stating a dominant position in how the robots of this setting view politics, then that is a dramatic psychological difference between humans and AIs, and one that is supported by the lack of self-preservation instincts or "common sense" in Melon et al.. Given a perceived opportunity to further their own security and resources at the expense of a well-identified out-group, groups of humans will almost assuredly exercise it. And this is not a "mistake," but a rational expression of the self- or kin-preservation instinct of an evolved creature. Humans only tangentially interact with the realms of ethics and morality; we are immersed, however, in the realms of in-group status and group security considerations. That a group of sapient entities might not prioritize self-preservation over ethics would seem wholly implausible to the reader, had we not been given so many instances of QC robots lacking what we consider "common sense." Thus, we come across a situation where prior writing affirms the point the author is trying to make in the present, rather than undercutting it through inconsistency. Hurray!

[Beelzebub1111]

I can see why humans would see this attitude as a moral superiority when they compare themselves to humans, and then extrapolate to robots what people do when groups see themselves as morally superior to other groups of people. Of course, Jeph wrote it to that all AI actually are morally superior to humans so they won't do that.

Like, I understand, that if this is the common view robots have towards humans, why conspiracies would form around some kind of AI takeover.

[Mechalich]

That a group of sapient entities might not prioritize self-preservation over ethics would seem wholly implausible to the reader, had we not been given so many instances of QC robots lacking what we consider "common sense."

Nah. It's just a fairly strong through-point in all kinds of science fiction stories that deal with sapient artificial intelligences. Of course the AIs would have a different set of moral priorities than our basic organic selves, they aren't driven by anything resembling the same hierarchy of needs that we are. QC has actually made the point that the AIs we see with the closest resemblance to a human mental state, notably Roko, are in fact massive outliers on the AI scale of mentality. Beepatrice's final line in fact expresses exactly the viewpoint of Minds from the Culture universe: we keep the humans around because it's more fun that way!

If anything, erratic AI behavior massively undermines Bubbles stated philosophical goal. AIs who act in ways that humans cannot understand, and that at the same time impose a danger to humans are far more likely to express a violent response than well-behaved and tightly controlled AIs that conform precisely to expectations.

[Ionathus]

Eh, this one's not working for me. This viewpoint makes sense for Bubbles, as it would for someone like Momo, but it rings kind of hollow given how utterly "WaCkY hIjiNkS" AI behavior has gotten recently (see: the entire last half-year in Cubetown).

It would be interesting to see the inter-AI dynamics of beings like Roko, Bubbles, Momo, Winslow, and (sometimes) Station standing there in the AI Meeting Room, arms crossed, saying "guys, guys, can we please calm down and talk about robo-philosophy now" while chaos rains down all around them from Beeps, Melon, Moray, May, Lemon, Pintsize, Evan, Yay, and Punchbot's wild madcap shenanigans...

But I suspect that Jeph mostly just wants to have his cake and eat it too, talking serious worldbuilding talk about robot morality and philosophy while in the same breath going dang guys isn't Moray soooooo gooooooooooofy??

Somewhat more seriously, technological change offers challenges to the extant construction of capitalism, and QC certainly presents more than enough technological change, in a decidedly compact timeframe, for there to be serious disruptions compared to the baseline condition of the early-2000s (while the exact amount of time that has lapsed in-universe is unclear, it's been less than ten years, plausibly QC is running at around 1/4-1/3 of real time).

I'm fairly certain QC is on "Comic-Book Time" -- even though the characters have experienced only a few years of time since the comic began, every strip is written in more or less "present day" and the timescale just slides and does a mini-retcon every time to keep things current.

[VoxRationis]

Eh, this one's not working for me. This viewpoint makes sense for Bubbles, as it would for someone like Momo, but it rings kind of hollow given how utterly "WaCkY hIjiNkS" AI behavior has gotten recently (see: the entire last half-year in Cubetown).

It would be interesting to see the inter-AI dynamics of beings like Roko, Bubbles, Momo, Winslow, and (sometimes) Station standing there in the AI Meeting Room, arms crossed, saying "guys, guys, can we please calm down and talk about robo-philosophy now" while chaos rains down all around them from Beeps, Melon, Moray, May, Lemon, Pintsize, Evan, Yay, and Punchbot's wild madcap shenanigans...

But I suspect that Jeph mostly just wants to have his cake and eat it too, talking serious worldbuilding talk about robot morality and philosophy while in the same breath going dang guys isn't Moray soooooo gooooooooooofy??

Well, that's exactly my point. A being that can idly decide to mutilate themselves with a melon baller lacks the security impulse that undergirds collective group violence. Now, to Mechalich's point, such a being might not be safe to be around for other reasons--they may decide to do something destructive to others out of curiosity--but they can't be convinced to "get them before they get us" because they don't value their own safety.

[Wraith]

Because you make a common assumption that just become someone is well informed and cognizant of one topic, then they should also be informed and cognizant of EVERY OTHER topics and you put on them unrealistic expectations?

I remain unconvinced that domestic violence is one of those contentious topics wherein anyone can have a positive or even neutral opinion of it.

Because that's the standard you are putting on Jeph.

See above. This is an exceptionally low standard, and I'm not ashamed to hold anyone to it.

We cant exactly travel back in time now do we?

If he can "go back" and edit his archives, he can leave a note under the same comic to point out that he's done it. He didn't "acknowledge" anything, he "covered it up".

=======

Anyways, regarding the last couple of comics:

Bubbles and Beepatrice are effectively saying that AIs have considered taking over the world, but have chosen not to do it because they have decided it wouldn't be "nice".

Corpse Witch: Sociopathic criminal.
May: Sociopathic ex-criminal.
Bubbles: Emotionally compromised amnesiac ex-weapon, possible war criminal.
Beepatrice: Hilariously incompetent.
Crushbot: Dangerously incompetent.
Melon: Insanely incompetent.
Roko: Emotionally unstable.
Station: Semi-omnipotent super intelligence.
Yay Newfriend: Sociopathic semi-omnipotent super intelligence.
The Director: Semi-omnipotent, alien super-intelligence and potential Ground Zero for a "Grey Goo of Morays" scenario.
Pintsize: Jerk.

This is *exactly* how suspicions WOULD arise! Who in their right mind would look at any member of that list, and NOT expect them to turn North America into a gulag and/or smoking crater by accident, let alone after purposefully changing their mind on a whim!?

[Ionathus]

Well, that's exactly my point. A being that can idly decide to mutilate themselves with a melon baller lacks the security impulse that undergirds collective group violence. Now, to Mechalich's point, such a being might not be safe to be around for other reasons--they may decide to do something destructive to others out of curiosity--but they can't be convinced to "get them before they get us" because they don't value their own safety.

Naw, I'm not saying that the internal logic of Bubbles's argument doesn't hold up or whatever. I see what you mean - technically the AIs' comedic ineptitude makes them less of a threat to humans.

But that doesn't make this strip interesting, nor does it make the flimsy "whatever-I-want-it-to-be" nature of the worldbuilding any less frustrating.

Either you're writing a serious sci-fi comic that explores the political and social impact of human-like AIs forming unions and fighting for civil rights, OR you're writing a slice-of-life comedy where AIs are so comedically lacking in maturity, survival instincts, and basic attention spans that Moray exists and is treated as plausible and none of the characters wise up and ask to be let out of the Nightmare Simulator. Pick a lane, Jeph.

I remain unconvinced that domestic violence is one of those contentious topics wherein anyone can have a positive or even neutral opinion of it.

Violence-as-comedy is pervasive in many cultures, including the one in which Jeph grew up. Some of that stuff rubs off on you in ways you don't expect and can't account for.

Should he have thought more about the choke-hold "joke"? Yes. Would a more considerate/introspective author have never used that joke in the first place? Probably. But I don't see any moral failing here, just a lack of awareness that he's hopefully gleaned by now.

The chance of missing the mark and saying something insensitive is always there. You can reduce that chance by being considerate and thinking about things from multiple viewpoints, but there's always a possibility you'll run into a niche case where your subconscious spits out something you internalized awhile ago and haven't examined for 5/10/30 years. The best thing for it is to fix the mistake, apologize if harm was done, and move on. Jeph seems to have done that.

Incidentally, I don't think Jeph owes anyone an explanation for retconning his own webcomics. Especially not when a given comic has only been live for hours or days. I don't see the malicious intent you're ascribing to this "stealth update." He fixed it. Mission accomplished. Move on.

[Mechalich]

Naw, I'm not saying that the internal logic of Bubbles's argument doesn't hold up or whatever. I see what you mean - technically the AIs' comedic ineptitude makes them less of a threat to humans.

But that doesn't make this strip interesting, nor does it make the flimsy "whatever-I-want-it-to-be" nature of the worldbuilding any less frustrating.

Either you're writing a serious sci-fi comic that explores the political and social impact of human-like AIs forming unions and fighting for civil rights, OR you're writing a slice-of-life comedy where AIs are so comedically lacking in maturity, survival instincts, and basic attention spans that Moray exists and is treated as plausible and none of the characters wise up and ask to be let out of the Nightmare Simulator. Pick a lane, Jeph.

Indeed. There's also the problem that 'AIs' don't make sense as a collective grouping here, at least not in a socio-economic sense. We have at least three different classes of AIs that relate to the world very differently. There's quasi-humans AIs, the kind we see most often, but there's also industrial AIs like the assembly line AI and those pesky nuclear power-plant AIs and also May prior to her forced embodiment where she presumably worked for some kind of financial firm and there's a third group of super-intelligent AIs.

This presents a level of inequality among the AIs that is orders of magnitude greater than those among humans. Bill Gates may have far more money than I will ever even see in my life (and I've visited mints), but he'll still grow old the same way I do, has roughly similar physical limitations, and thinks are approximately the same speed as me even if he's somewhat smarter overall. By contrast, an AI superintelligence like Station is immortal, has the ability to control dozens of human-sized drones at once, and thinks thousands of times faster than a quasi-human AI like Bubbles. As such, only the superintelligences matter. Bubbles speaks of 'we' in the most recent strip as if collective AI decision making includes her. It doesn't. She doesn't get a vote, she is more powerless before her AI overlords than any human has ever been before any tyrant in history.

Now, the same thing is true of the humans as well, probably. QC is a world in which a 'hard takeoff' AI singularity scenario happened, but the AI superintelligence(s) that resulted from this chose to more or less do nothing subsequently, or at least nothing that impacted humanity in a global sense. And sure, that's not impossible. 'Cleansing the Earth would be boooring' is certainly a perspective a superintelligence could take, but everyone else is impossible sanguine about the whole thing. Heck, the various superintelligences are being absurdly cavalier about each other. The Director, notably, is a potential threat to all the beings funding its continued existence.

[Beelzebub1111]

I can't tell if we are supposed to think this theory is ridiculous or not. Judging by Fae and Bubbles's reactions it's supposed to be totally loony, however in a meta-context we know that it is absolutely true.

[The Glyphstone]

I get the impression these supposed 'Deep AI's are even more beyond than Yay or the Director, who are both at least capable of interacting with people if poorly. Remember Bubbles has met and is aware of Yay.

[Beelzebub1111]

I read it as the director is one of the Deep AI and that's why it needs moray to communicate.

[KillianHawkeye]

I read it as the director is one of the Deep AI and that's why it needs moray to communicate.

Yeah, that seems plausible. Also, he is literally a deep AI, being housed deep underwater and all.

[Cikomyr2]

Yeah, that seems plausible. Also, he is literally a deep AI, being housed deep underwater and all.

I totally believe this is what its intended to refer. Otherwise Jeff is really, really oblivious to himself.

[Beelzebub1111]

I totally believe this is what its intended to refer. Otherwise Jeff is really, really oblivious to himself.

Well he's directly referencing Yay this strip. I hope he also considers The Director.

[Vinyadan]

I find it funny that Yay was first described as the AI equivalent of a giant squid, and then an actual giant squid super AI was introduced.

[Wraith]

This feels like a bit of a ret-con. Not in a bad way, just that Beepatrice is voicing this 'conspiracy theory' about there being AI so powerful that they can't relate to humans even though that appears to be common knowledge for Momo that she freely shares with Emily, and Station freely discusses the concept of Yay with... everyone in the room.

I get that the irony of Beeps discussing her theory of Super-AIs with Bubbles and Faye who know at least one personally, but its not really even a conspiracy theory? It's actually true, and not just that but its common knowledge among people who have a passing interest in the formation of AIs.

Beeps is, of course, a dumbass. It'll make more sense next week if Yay turns up and pats Beep on the head or something, just to enjoy the thrill of being a secret around laymen.

[Pax1138]

I think there's probably more layers of AI complexity than just the regular robots and these Deep-AI. Station and his equals are probably the more powerful AIs Momo was talking about who speak to humans with subroutines and/or only a part of themselves, but things like Yay clearly outclass Station in a way he wasn't expecting. I don't know about the Director; he may have just not been designed to talk to humans, so he doesn't have the equivalent "subroutine," unless you count Moray.

These Deep AI may be things even beyond Yay, giants who don't even acknowledge the ants of humanity, let alone want to communicate with them. Then again, the way this series goes, they'd probably want to watch and hang around humanity because they're cool and interesting.

[Wraith]

That makes sense; the Mega-AI that Momo talks about are definitely on a different level to Yay. Yay struggles with human interactions, emotions and ethics whereas the other ones barely have those concepts at all... But then maybe Yay is more powerful because they've been through the 'alien intelligence' phase and have come back around to learning a new way of thinking on par with humans....?

QC gradually becoming a shonen anime, as each time a powerful character is revealed it immediately gets slapped down by an even more powerful character who was... y'know, around but just off screen, they didn't feel like getting involved in the last plot arc for... reasons.

[Yuki Akuma]

This feels like a bit of a ret-con. Not in a bad way, just that Beepatrice is voicing this 'conspiracy theory' about there being AI so powerful that they can't relate to humans even though that appears to be common knowledge for Momo that she freely shares with Emily, and Station freely discusses the concept of Yay with... everyone in the room.

I get that the irony of Beeps discussing her theory of Super-AIs with Bubbles and Faye who know at least one personally, but its not really even a conspiracy theory? It's actually true, and not just that but its common knowledge among people who have a passing interest in the formation of AIs.

Beeps is, of course, a dumbass. It'll make more sense next week if Yay turns up and pats Beep on the head or something, just to enjoy the thrill of being a secret around laymen.

Conspiracy theories do not necessarily need to be about fake things - it's just that a lot of them are.

There have been conspiracy theories that turned out to be true, because sometimes people really do perform conspiracies.

[Mechalich]

In the AI research space, there is the concept of AI alignment, which is broadly stated how closely the AI is in sync with human behaviors, goals, and values. This is different from overall AI power, as represented by their computing capacity and intelligence. As such, two AIs might be of similar overall power but vastly different alignment. In QC, this could be represented by Station and The Director. They might have similar total capacity, but The Director's alignment is vastly deflected from human norms to the point that it needs an intermediary to communicate.

Yay is significantly more powerful than an AI like Station, but at the same time, is clearly better aligned to humanity than The Director. Yay can, after all, hold an ordinary conversation. It's possible that there are AIs out there on Yay's level with an alignment level similar to that of the Director, though whether or not they have even bothered to remain on Earth is unclear.

[SaintRidley]

Marten's mom is right. It's not healthy to kinkshame yourself.

[Vinyadan]

Marten's mom is right. It's not healthy to kinkshame yourself.

But what if you have a self-humiliation fetish?