LordFall

@Carl-Richard Because an engineer who treats an ecosystem as a machine to manipulate will inevitably create second-order side effects that break the system. You cannot sustainably govern or optimize a living whole from an attitude of mechanical detachment. That’s why. @Joshe Calling it purely a "personality type" misses how life conditions force worldview evolution. You don't get "Yellow" just because you're born with an analytical mind; you reach systemic thinking when the simplistic dogmas of Blue, the individualist rat race of Orange, and the egalitarian consensus paralysis of Green completely fail to resolve the chaotic, interconnected problems in front of you. Temperament influences how you express a stage, but Tier 2 is fundamentally about cognitive complexity which is the capacity to hold multiple competing paradigms simultaneously without needing to destroy any of them to feel safe.

These are complicated issues with no easy answers. Kraft originally showed a lot of maturity by offering an open sit-down with Macklemore, and when Macklemore challenged him on Instagram by donating his $1M tour salary, Kraft actually put up $2 million for humanitarian aid. Yet people are still trying to burn down Ed Sheeran just for getting caught in the crossfire of venue owners and tour politics. It shows that for a lot of activists, it’s not about resolution, diplomacy, or actual aid dollars—it's about demanding total ideological submission and running public shaming campaigns on anyone who doesn't echo the exact script.

@yetineti Let’s be real about what actually happened on the stream. Within the first ten minutes, I laid out my definition of value—the empirical ability to create abundance and solve real-world problems for others as well as being able to help them achieve their goals. From that point right up until the end, you refused to engage with that framework, refused to share how you provide value in your own life, and refused to offer any contrasting definition of your own. Around the 33 minute mark, you explicitly stated on air that you wouldn't tell us how you're embodying the idea of value in your life and that's not why you wanted to have the talk. It seems like you deliberately ran away from the debate framing beforehand just so you wouldn't have to take a concrete stance and defend it on air. That's what I mean by evasion. One of my biggest critiques of people on this forum is the unhealthy Stage Green attitude so many post from. It manifests as a total avoidance of real-world accountability through spiritual bypassing—this idea that "if I'm part of universal consciousness, then tangible standards of value, competence, and societal utility don't apply to me." You brought that exact posture into our conversation: retreating into abstract meta-philosophy to avoid being measured by any concrete standard whatsoever. It seemed like you wanted to spend four hours endlessly philosophizing about the abstract concept of value and debating why we even need to produce value in the first place. Ironically, I didn't find that conversational loop to be very valuable, and after 90 minutes of it, I had enough and called it. It's a good thing you pivoted to a conversation frame beforehand, because if this were scored as a real debate, I would've clearly won on substance, structure, and clarity.

You're underestimating the infrastructure already in place to push this transition forward. AI fucking up and causing unexpected damages sounds like the perfect use case for the insurance industry to step in. A conglomerate could layoff 10 000 of its staff and replace them with 5000 robots and if 500 of these robots fuckup it's still less expensive than 10 000 wages(made up numbers but you get the idea.) A minimum wage fast food worker in California can be paid as low as $20 USD/hour, that's a $41.6K/yearly base salary. To replace fast food workers with Robots is not yet economically viable but the tilt of the pendulum towards it being so is most likely gonna happen around 2028 and tilt further towards cost reduction indefinitely in favor of AI labor.

If someone’s entire sense of belonging and identity is tied to an employer giving them a 9-to-5 task to survive, they never had sovereign meaning in the first place, they are a wage slave. Throughout history, the leisure classes (philosophers, inventors, artists) didn't have "jobs," yet they produced nearly all our math, science, and literature. When you remove coercive survival, people don't just rot; they form communities around sports, crafts, art, family, and local projects. Confusing a corporate job with existential purpose is a very modern, industrial-era mindset. Human beings are creative animals, we will find things to build and care about whether we're forced to punch a clock or not.

You should make a thread similar to @Olaf and make it your month long quest to get laid. I think 30 days should be enough to find a beautiful lady willing to share your bed. Take my advice and get on dating apps and you should be able to schedule 5-6 dates in a month and one of them is pretty likely to be DTF. Then make songs about getting laid like a lot of rappers do and profit. Setting sail to lose oneself against the warm, sun-drenched silk of her shores.

Why will it cause a massive amount of suffering? The Amish today choose to live without technology and think it's a better way of life. They could be right but I'm not joining them anytime soon. The key concept IMO, is giving people choice. If you raise the floor and provide people food and housing then some of them will choose to live a life of leisure and not provide any value to the state. Some others will spend their life building unthinkable technologies with their free time. If AI and robotics can allow us to support both types of people on a global scale, and I think it will, the next few hundred years of human evolution is looking unbelievably bright.

@Carl-Richard You’re right that Western theorists often confuse temporary spiritual states with actual ego stages, but using that to invalidate Stage Turquoise is an intellectual blunder. Yellow’s trap is over-intellectualization. At Yellow, you’re the detached engineer standing outside the machine, mapping out levers and feedback loops. It’s competent, but it’s still fundamentally mental and mechanical. Turquoise isn’t just rediscovering ancient Eastern mysticism or New Age vibes; it solves Yellow's fatal flaw. It takes all that complex systems thinking and actually embodies it—moving from viewing reality as an engineered mechanism you analyze, to realizing you are a living cell inside the organism itself.

Well I find it easier to play my life in sections instead of all at once. What your plan for 2027 overall? What about Q4-2026? When do these decisions about jobs and signing up for university courses need to be made?

Except this is your gut feeling and not fully based in reality. Of course the human tendency towards selfishness is worth considering but post scarcity has been baked into AI from the start. People have been writing books theorizing on the economic conditions that will come after AI/robots are able to labor for us for over 50 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-Scarcity_Anarchism There are UBI movements being passed through legislative assemblies all around the world right now. This one Bill S-206 is being reviewed by the Canadian Senate as we speak. https://www.ubiworks.ca/guaranteed-livable-basic-income We should not make UBI our personal life strategy for the next 10 years but if we mean a general trend that humanity is going towards, seems more than likely that it'll be the state of most global economies in 20 years.

They just had their closed opening night on Saturday, George R.R. Martin and Peter Jackson attended! Kim Kardashian was there too apparently, that's cool. https://www.reddit.com/r/gameofthrones/comments/1wms06f/george_rr_martin_peter_jackson_and_guillermo_del/

I'm 31, not in my mid-20s. I don't claim to be turquoise, but I have had many mystical experiences experiencing the world from that paradigm. Be careful not to judge a book by its cover. My life purpose is to help solve mankind's problems while creating entertaining events through my soon-to-be global communities. I don't think partying and serious personal development are mutually exclusive at all. Measuring Tier 2 awareness by having kids, being 50, and pulling a €200k salary is confusing a LinkedIn resume with developmental psychology. Spiral stages track worldview, operating paradigm, and cognitive development.

Just released an original soundtrack for the game! It features one of the first antagonist factions The Iveilan Empire and their sailor ballad. Really excited about this part of the development. It might seem that I'm not focusing on the game development much, that'll come. I think the cultural development is actually way more important and will pay off 100x once it takes off. My goal is to build a catalogue of these tracks; for the ones that people like best, I'll hire local musicians to perform them and film it for a mixed reality experience. The whole idea is that Legend of the Abyss is not a game, it's a world that you can inhabit that also intersects with our own world. I'm picturing about a year from now when I start showing it at comic/anime conventions, we can have a post convention fan meetup at a bar and people will sing the songs they like and talk about which factions of the universe they like best and why. There people will make friends or romantic partners that they can play the flagship version of the game with and it will serve as both an offline and online experience unlike a game that isolates you socially. Hitting the musical element is a move that might seem unorthodox but seems like a no brainer stroke of genius to me. Let's see how it pays off!

It was clearly defined. We agreed to a conversation examining a man's value and more specifically how you define and demonstrate that in your own life. Instead, you avoided defining what you think value is, refused to share how you provide it to the people around you, and forced me to spend an hour re-explaining my own metrics and defending why the topic was even worth exploring. You came in with an agenda to cross-examine the host rather than engage the prompt. I gave you over an hour of leeway to bring substance to the table, and once it became clear the play was deflection and evasion, I pulled the plug. The tape is on the channel for anyone who wants to see how it played out.

Lifestyle and models of masculinity sounds like a solid premise. We’ll take the lessons from this one and set it up properly: a clearly defined thesis on both sides, a concrete outline, and a 60-minute timeframe. Shoot me a message closer to January and we’ll lock in the date and structure.

Having a job right now would give you a lot more flexibility and options. Also higher education is less safe than ever right now with the AI revolution happening. If I were you I would be in the trenches being able to try stuff yourself, this will give you the most skill training and overall marketplace value. It's how I live my own life and as long as you have a safety net built to cover downside risk, it's the best way to live to gain competence.

Ben is a gem for owning it directly, most of Crypto Twitter and YouTube analysts quietly delete tweets and pivot narrative the second things don't go their way. He didn't see this rally coming but his macro thesis kept people from incinerating their stacks on altcoins for the last two years while BTC dominance ran the show. You should use his channel for risk management and cycle history, not to front run temporary pumps.

Let's do it. What would you like to debate?

To me, it felt like we got caught in a filibuster. To be fair to Yeti, he was aiming for an open-ended, exploratory dialogue, but we set a specific topic meant to explore how we practically provide value to those around us—and how each of us approaches that. When the response shifted to indignation that the question was even being asked, the conversation lost its structure and began moving in circles. While I appreciate him coming on and being willing to chat, I had to call it once we were spending more time debating the premise than exploring the topic itself. Appreciate the feedback from everyone, future streams will have clearer guardrails, hard time limits, and tighter moderation so expectations are aligned from the start.

@yetineti We set a topic and you spent an hour and half not answering the question and then questioning why you should even answer. I think I made my points quite simple and clear but the conversation was not productive and going in circle. The VOD is up for those who couldn't watch it live, thanks for everyone that came on and asked questions!

We're live!

He's confirmed so we're good for 8 PM, see you there! @Lyubov @Rishabh R Wrote down your questions to talk about on stream.

Yeah I call it just being at the cause or the effect. People that can't make things happen for themselves develop resentment that seeps out in other ways. Also being a pleasant nice guy is a survival strategy that people adopt not necessarily because it's 100% who they are but because especially in the post WW2 era there was an abundance of economic upside so that's all you needed to do to find your place in society. Even as a man, I avoid associating with low-value males. It’s not out of malice—it’s practical. They rarely possess the agency or competence to help you move toward ambitious goals, and more importantly, they carry an unhealed psyche that inevitably rears its head in all kinds of erratic, unpredictable ways (as @AION and I were touching on earlier). Women have to be even more selective since they're gonna entangle their lives with these men and have kids with them. A man doesn't need to be a dangerous criminal to still have a majorly negative impact on a woman's life.

It's great to think God is purely all loving but when we think about an omnipotent creator of the universe, sadism must by definition be one of its top traits. If one was omnipotent there would be no need to use evolution as a way to evolve consciousness, there would be little to learn if you know everything and have infinite intelligence to calculate everything. One of the traps that such a being could fall into though would very simply be boredom. So creating billions of creatures that fight amongst each other can perhaps be proved as one of the foundational divine plans and be based in the enjoyment of watching them fight and kill each other infinitely which can simply be recapped as sadism. The idea of a hierarchy of values is key because I'm not claiming sadism is God's primary value—reality could easily be engineered to be far more agonizing if pure malice were the objective— but it clearly sits much higher in the divine design hierarchy than conventional spirituality is comfortable admitting.

Here is the really inspiring story of Jordy Lakiere who built we who are about to die by himself which is one of the biggest gladiator games out there. Cool to see how he made it happen and how it went from not much traction to blowing up due to an entertaining concept and a strong demo that made it big on Steam Next Fest. He launched the full game in November 2022 and these are his thoughts a year later in late 2023. Success stories are helping me stay motivated and keep trudging along.