This stream auto-updates
- Past hour
-
Lila9 replied to Rafael Thundercat's topic in Society, Politics, Government, Environment, Current Events
So don’t tag only me. Stop being hyperfixated on me. Stop over-obsessing and overassessing my posts while you don’t do the same for others. This is why I can’t take any critique or advice from you seriously because of the bullying and witch hunt you take part in. So many people derailed this thread, but you decided to target me and my post which was neutral assement intended only to the OP. -
A.I. girlfriends have entered the chat
-
See my Instagram videos. They are like that. They cover all the topics I speak about on the blog and YT channel. God, epistemology, spirituality, psychology, politics, success, business, life purpose, Spiral Dynamics, philosophy, science, dating, sense-making, morality, etc.
-
I will make that clear on the sales page.
-
Interview with Valter Longo about peptides:
-
Pretty crazy how many things AI and people can express in ASCII. Sure but there you are making a big info reduction by assuming shared context. The reason why its enough to say it in natural language the way you did, is because you assume that the reader will interpret your natural language in a physics specific way. Almost all of those terms can be used outside the context of physics. For instance "energy" is extremely ambigous and is used in a 100 different way outside of physics. Now do it for the whole equation and express even numbers in natural language.
-
It's actually very possible to express any physics or maths equation in natural language. It's how we originally learn the abstracted language in schools and universities. For example, E = 1/2 mv^2 is easily translated as Energy equals half the mass multiplied by the velocity squared.
-
Agreed, but the criticism (at least for me) isn't of the use of language to express a perspective, rather it's of the abuse of that feature. Imagine instead of using + for arithmetic operations, I use it to draw a dog, in the form of ASCII Art. But I don't share it as art. I share it as truth. That's obviously problematic. The language has its place and time and usage. That still doesn't excuse the abuse.
-
-
I think some of that is obscuring things, but there are bad examples in your list because depending on the context it makes sense to use slightly different words and the other thing that you forget is that scientists are not writing researchg papers for layman, they are writing it for their peers who are already competent and familiar in the area. The implication that you are making is that for every given specific field, everyone should only use natural language and should only use natural language the way layman do, and that it is just a bad requirement to make, because it would make writing papers and understanding papers harder, because of the introduced ambiguity. Like imagine if you would make the exact same criticism about math and to lets ditch symbols like "/,*, +,-,=" etc, lets ditch algebra and then express all mathematical operations in natural language only. If you thought math was hard, then try to express and understand math only using layman , natural language from now on (if thats even possible). Or I dare you to express some extremely dense physics equation only using natural language and lets see whats your shortest most understandable way to express and explicate the meaning of said equation (I have no idea wtf is going on here, im just giving it as an example)
-
https://www.actualized.org/insights/women-will-never-satisfy-men In a nutshell:
-
This sort of thing isn't unique to science.
-
https://www.sciencealert.com/pcos-is-officially-renamed-after-decades-of-misinformation For decades, the official diagnosis was called PCOS (Polycystic Ovary Syndrome). That name turned out to be misleading, making the condition harder to understand and treat properly. I personally know several women who struggled with it and couldn’t find an easy solution. After years of research and refinement, experts have recognized that the condition is far more systemic than just involving the female reproductive system. The new name—PMOS (Polyendocrine Metabolic Ovarian Syndrome)—better reflects how it affects the entire body and hormone system. This change should improve diagnosis tools, medical procedures, and treatment plans—ultimately advancing women’s health worldwide. Stay healthy, y'all!
- Today
-
Hahahahah
-
Enjoyed that, thanks for sharing. Also, none of those things are obvious deception to most people, least of all to the persons writing those into their papers. It takes a lot to stand back and see it, let alone then detect it without heavy attention.
-
Bodily movement that involves coordination is goal-oriented. Most 4-month-olds can hold objects. Closing your fist around an object and holding it involves coordination. The goal is to hold the object. If the 4-month-old fails in that goal, that could be a source of anger.
-
I think it mostly has to do with control and power dynamics. Just like how a social media influencer would speak with confidence to get their point through and make it take effect. They have to demonstrate absolute confidence and certainty and sophistication to gain your trust and establish their authority. Typical human behaviour, and totally understandable too. A humble science will not be taken seriously by the layman. So scientists have to play these games, even if mostly subconsciously.
-
Very nice and important. Thank you! Who compiled this, by the way?
-
Not only the fact, the entire platform is regulated almost entirely by AI, the channels are also one of the YT feels lifeless. AI pushes slop, even if it extremely radical and full of hate, as long as the number under engagement is high and if there is no actual hate word used. Now this, corporate buying already built YT channels (some examples are given already) but many are not. Political creators are the easy target of being bought as they usually work of "divide and rule" or fear instillment. Personally I recommend using alternative front ends of YT, like 1. Newpipe 2. Invidious 3. Piped For android users, REvanced Youtube is the easiest of choices. One can create a setting where the shorts do not pop up entirely on the app, also there are no ads. These aren't bad per say, they are open sourced frontends for YT Music, or Music app in general, OpenTune, is the best, but also for android users only, open sourced YT Music app. You can play/stream any video in MP3 format without ads. These are some recommendations for one to have more control over the media they consume. Especially now when every major mainstream platform is about engagement, they are built to keep you hooked. -
True
-
My brain is rubbing your brain with this one
-
-
Self-obscure: To hide one's own weakness behind complexity. Works as a verb. "He self-obscures whenever the topic gets close to something he doesn't actually understand."
-
Why would anyone who cares about truth play all these games when writing a research paper? Obscuritism 🌈 It blows my mind that most scientist are not conscious that they are partaking in obscuritism. 🤯 The first Insight that that should come to someone's mind when they are exposed to Scientific language is that their intentionally fluffing it all up to make them sound as smart as possible. Which is one of the stupidest things you can do, and lacks intellectual integrity
-
Regarding behavior that repeats: what about novel events like Michael Jackson being born? But isn't every birth also novel? Every cycle, every repetition? It's just a change in the particular configuration of the entire universe. Also, I don't see how you could separate behavior from the conditions. Like if an elephant spawned 40 ft up in the air in front of your front porch, how would you know whether that wasn't supposed to happen? "Laws" are just best guesses best on previous observations: per Hume, you can't say for sure whether you have found "the conditions" that produces the behavior. So not sure where we are going with this. The NDE point I made that you're referencing was essentially this (and it's a bit more specific than "NDE events"): If we find out we can see in a way that is not requiring sensory organs built through millions of years of evolution, then it makes you think that maybe other things we previously thought required evolution (e.g. higher thinking, planning, deliberation, intention) could also exist prior to evolution, and maybe that applies to God itself. So it's not just thoughts and intentions floating around in the ether perhaps as non-physical formed etherial beings but they are at the foundation of the workings of the entire reality. It may seem like a big jump, but it makes you think in that direction. As for assigning a probability to this suggestion, I have virtually no idea. But it seems like it opens you mind towards thinking in that direction. The alternative would be that you would not discover the way of seeing without biological sense organs and then the thought wouldn't even arise. Then you're certainly further from thinking about concluding in that direction. Now, I deliberately avoided addressing the following issues for sake of clarity: I spoke about two types of naturalism in that thread, and in the response above, I talked about naturalism in the limited sense of biological evolution and other mainstream contemporary ideas being the "physical laws". While in the other sense of the word, I talked about it as being essentially compatible with what we now like to call "supernaturalism": i.e., if we were to deduce the laws governing the mind of God were the mind of God be agential and capable of planning and other higher thinking functions, then we have capitulated naturalism while still conceding to supernaturalism. So when you ask me how do I square naturalism and supernaturalism (or how do I move towards either and away from the other), we have to make clear what idea of naturalism we're using. By the way, sorry for "dodging" the few last times, sometimes I just forget to respond (but I actually didn't forget this time, I just had to wait for the right time).
.thumb.png.6923c588efc2b0a901602fddf3954db2.png)