This stream auto-updates
- Past hour
-
When you're at the peak of death and see a crocodile still trying to eat you. Honestly sometimes you wish this piece of shit would be strong enough to get me . . before I break his face and send him into hell hahaha Don't try me Crocs I m God champion 🏆
-
It is important to keep in mind how much time Leo took to study subjects and the big picture. He is right that he does understand many things far deeper than most people because he has the time to read hundreds of books and videos and papers and contemplate for tenthousands of hours. Almost nobody has that willingness nor the time to do the same. I've read maybe 30 high quality deep books and studied a lot of things he studied and spent 1000s of hours on research and contemplation on my own and understand sociology, politics, science, developemental psychology, how institutions develope and a lot more than maybe 85 percent of the people of my country and people get pissed if you tell or show them how little they know while they like to talk ignorantly. And that's no brag but an honest assessment. Every time I get an deep insight through composition and interweawing of different perspectives and deep study and I happen to stumble upon an old post or video I realize that he already had this insight years ago. Is he a bigot for claiming that no one has a monopoly on definitions and perspectives like that post about scientists recently? I think yes. However, some perspectives or definitions are far better in describing a thing more accurately because of far better knowlegde on a subject like cults for example. People through it around like candy. I happen to know through new age circles about a guy who is creating a cult right now and people accusing leo have no idea about how that works in reality or online because they don't want nor have 100 hours of time to study the subject and don't understand the gravity of their accusations and that with their aggressive ignorance they behave like hyenas and leo cannot give them food for their delusional views by doing more than admitting that he was ungrounded and imply mistakes because they would act like hyenas and like to portay him moreso like a delusional cult leader and harm this whole place.
-
I am serious. I will ban everyone on this forum who is incapable of learning. I am not kidding. Tread carefully. I am not going to argue with you about peanuts endlessly.
-
"Ugh, so much unconsciousness, corruption, and drama. Where are Goodness and Love, guys?" *disappears into the rainbow. 🌈
-
If you have something to prove you will never truly listen, take in or understand what another person is presenting. Seeking validity is a root cause of this - and we emotionally pick which domain we want validity based on our values. I think these types value their perceived masculinity - so they play the part of the "Prover". And they attempt to wield logic, rationality and thought as methods to avoid contradiction. It is really the emotion that wants to avoid contradiction, as it is the emotion that is the motivator.
-
You take me for an idiot. It it amazing you guys still do that after everything I taught you.
-
Of course I know that. That doesn't mean you won't get lost in local details at the loss of the big picture. I don't deny that local details affect the big picture, just that people are using the local details to get the wrong picture. There is no generic solution to this problem. It's all depends on case-by-case. That's way too oversimplified. I am have not said otherwise. You are looking for things to argue with me over now.
-
Not even that with your "big picture" ass. System thinking of a high schooler.
-
I honestly think the discussion and confrontation are way more fruitful for people than not having it. If you don't like the question at the source of the discussion as applied to this place, ask yourself why that is.
-
More self responsability. shall focus more on generating better realities.
-
Even your system thinking is high school level. Tier 2 Epistemology my ass. If you actually had internalized Spiral Dynamics or Wilber's holarchies (an actual spiritual intellectual who did the homework unlike you) instead of regurgitating, you wouldn't be making such ignorant statements. Reality is nested holarchies (self -> family -> tribe -> country) with influences across every level. That's why "big picture" alone is not enough. Zoom out of Earth long enough and it's a speck of dust. That's where you are right now, on your high horse.
-
The argument is that your confidence in your estimation was built from a very shallow understanding of what AI is. You're extrapolating from "chatbot". If you have no real-world understanding of agentic coding, you can't begin to reason about AI's value intelligently. About a month or two ago you claimed AI couldn't code this forum, and I'm guessing you still believe this based on things you've said here. And you're just wrong and refusing to update, no matter how many people tell you you're wrong. As an experiment, spin up Fable 5 right now and say "recode actualized.org's forum. No questions. Just get it done." Watch what happens. Then ask "how powerful would this tool be in capable hands?" "Fable 5, build an Excel clone". This is now possible by one human. So you have two choices. Collect proof that I'm right and update, or tell me (a daily claude code user who follows multiple senior SWEs) and everyone else using these tools that none of us know wtf we're talking about.
-
If you actually took the time to study "technical" topics, you would quickly realize that while the "big picture" is freshman systems thinking 101, the graduate course-equivalent is understanding dynamical systems, phase transitions, heavy-tailed events, etc, all of which have local to global dynamics. All the shit that popped the previous bubbles - real estate, dot com, railway, was literally the straw that broke the camel's back - the minor details. It took Michael Berry sifting through all the credit swaps. The causes for the phase transitions, such as a "bubble pop" you cannot infer from your "big picture" high horse. If you got off it and started doing the work instead of calling it "minutia", you would stops being black and white in your thinking, and you gain the nuance that both AI is a bubble due to mismatch in Capex and Revenue (ref) and AI is gonna upend everything you know.
-
You edited it, read above. Did you learn to admit your failure? Start doing that yourself. If you cannot learn to admit whenever you're plain wrong after several years, you're fooling yourself about the class you're in.
-
It is certainly your platform, and you didn't listen to him much, to be frank. You did your Tier 2 moves of spiritually ignoring him with the usual mechanisms. Why do you pretend that your pretext for banning him is true? He was probably the most rigorous and intellectually open-minded user here. He could run circles around you and everyone else. Many of your responses boiled down to "you don't know what you're talking about™," and similar. Whenever you mention open- or closed-mindedness, I like to pay attention to the subtext of how those terms are used. My assessment is that, usually, to put it naively, they are based on your intuition of whether you are believed - or not. You're not going to like that you do the same thing - that of being "closed-minded." It just takes the form of a couched, spiritual, condescending Actualized veneer.
-
Highlighting the "good science" (1 + 2) is scientific, speaking on social dynamics is not - that is "history of science" The fact that there are literally thousands of scientists and mathematicians that do psychedelics/sprituality and stellar science, many of whom I have referenced before. The difference between them and you is that: (1) they keep their schizo/intuitive ideas to themselves before crystallizing them rigorously/empirically (2) they have the humility to understand that the collective intelligence of everything we have build as humans is bigger than any one of us, because it has been built over millennia from thousands of people, some of which have most certainly been more spiritually gifted than you. If you actually practiced "good science" in terms of (1) and (2), you wouldn't be facing all this criticism. The "couple of things" we are highlighting are examples of the larger systemic problem - your hubris and double standards.
-
Human Mint replied to Human Mint's topic in Spirituality, Consciousness, Awakening, Mysticism, Meditation, God
@LordFall Glad you like the post. -
Human Mint replied to Human Mint's topic in Spirituality, Consciousness, Awakening, Mysticism, Meditation, God
And taking it further, the foundation of any connection. Union is mutual understanding. - Today
-
Natasha Tori Maru replied to Elliott's topic in Society, Politics, Government, Environment, Current Events
It will change how people participate with cognitive tasks. Unknown effects. We see some stuff thats shit already. The fact that AI is abused in education by students reveals the cracks that were always present; education was always about passing the test, never about true understanding and crafting a cognitively astute, clear mind. Students use it to pass - which lowers participation. This was already a problem. Just amplified with AI. Education system was busted, AI just amplified it. I am interesting in ethical guardrails and programming of AI - who is in control of that? Should there be total transparency there? Pros/cons? I am already frustrated enough that consumer AI doesn't like to give a straight answer to general ethical/moral questions & general societal/systemic problems - I feel like this is also getting worse. This is different to using say, Claude or ChatGPT to read documents/contracts and extract precise meaning and terms. When it is appropriately trained on something I find it fantastic for fast referencing and compiling. Anyway, I digress - Yesterday
-
I don't know, Rick. -- You guys are really hung up on that one forum post. It was a hasty post that I regret making. I share raw, personal, aspirational stuff on this forum sometimes. I am sometimes eager so share a new thing I just discovered or am working on. I do get things wrong sometimes. Especially in a forum post. My standards for rigor in a forum post is much lower than a video, blog, or course. I don't even consider my forum posts to be my official body of work. I use this forum to think through my newest ideas out loud. This forum serves as a sounding-board for my ideas. Not all ideas survive. -- You began to actually admit your failure above to a degree, and then somehow reverted to the same defense mechanisms. And now you retroactively emotionally protect your self-image if people start developing some discernment. For some reason, you insist on wanting to appear special. It's usually made through future promises, too.
-
Here is the truth buddy. Everyone and everything is whatever you want.
-
@Joshe The problem I have with the arguement you guys are making here on AI is that you are trying to win the argument on narrow technical ground: "Leo hasn't used LLMs to code, so he doesn't see how useful it is." But this muddles a larger point. The larger point is that even that AI will underperform in the long-run when all factors are taken into account. I concede the point that I have not coded with AI. I am looking at the big picture.
-
@LordFall science does work and bring us nice things but its fundamentally ignoring the fact that we don't know where these nice things are coming from. Outside your retna is a big question mark. We cant know wether these things are coming from science of God is just creating them and giving them to us. Science denies the fact that science isn't objective its completely subjective and outside of your body science does not exist because you cannot prove it objectively. In a way science does us a favor by proving without a shadow of a doubt that you cannot prove anything objectively. But they are completely ignoring this fact and chaining people to a structure that only exists in subjective view. Ultimately disconnecting people from God. Science is showing that our brains are creating the physics that science says is objective and all our brains are wired in the same way to perceive physics the same. The thing thats supposed to expand our conciousness and understanding is actually limiting our conciousness and understanding. Any understanding you get from science is a personal understanding that only comes when you get further from science and closer to God. The big aha moments are actually the person coming out of the brainwashing of science and understanding something science is covering up.
-
"I can be wrong" is said from above the error. It's the master looking at his fallibility in the abstract, granting the error is possible. The self stays elevated the whole time. Nothing is lost. Whereas owning a live error where others are right and you are wrong means climbing down off your perch and standing level with the people who corrected you. It means being an ordinary person who got it wrong and got told so before there's any story available that turns the error into wisdom or the correction into something you already actually knew, or the critics into people who missed your larger point. People don't want "I can be wrong". They want you to demonstrate in real-time you're capable of owning your error. That tends to matter to people with integrity. When truth and self-image collide, can you put truth first? Instead of saying "I can be wrong", say "It appears I am wrong and haven't even explored a large part of this space where the actual value is, let me reconsider all this stuff you guys showed me". This is all people want you to demonstrate, because the inability to demonstrate what everyone considers a basic virtue points to something much larger than being right or wrong. But, I've been trying to tell everyone. It's not going to happen bro. It's just how Leo is and there is no path to correction because it's deeply structural and load-bearing.
-
Yeah, I call bullshit. Your understanding of science is superficial, high school level at best, which is why shit like this: Reads like the joke and not the "weasels, cogs, rats" or "bigots". The fact that you cannot even distinguish between the subjects of "science" and "history of science" is even more telling. You think you are speaking on the former, but only ever living in the latter.
