Bobby_2021

This is just a hypothetical point that is also reductionistic in nature. If you abuse a kid, she will have enough anger to kill you at the moment. But no one takes it seriously because the child is obviously underdeveloped and is merely REACTING to you. It is an act of territorial display and aggression. "We are dangerous monsters, do not come near us". If you are saying that Hamas would genocide Israelis with nukes, then Hamas would have to first evolve themselves above stage red to get to develop nukes. So, by the time they develop their own nukes, they would have enough restraint, maturity and development to not use them for genocide. But if Hamas had the nukes, Israel would think twice about the illegal occupation. So, if you want to argue in hypotheticals, here you go. A lot of things would be different if Hamas had nukes or the competence to genocide Israelis. But the whole problem is that Israel would not even allow Gaza to have their own airport, forget nukes. Genocidal intend has been established and is not considered a point of contention. They are already executing on their will.

Barking dogs seldom bite. If a dog really wants to kill you it will approach you silently from behind and rip off your ass. Dogs that viciously bark are showing aggression to fend you off because the dog sees you as a THREAT.

Leo Gura vs Geo Lura will break the internet.

It's a targeted disinformation campaign meant to install doubt in the minds of people regarding the legitimacy of the election. This will act as the precedence for the actual coup. It's insane that they have found a rulebook that's so ruthlessly effective that it just bloody works for half a decade and more.

Why am I not surprised? It's their fault for not electing a weak pathetic feminist pushover woman as president.

Because they are resisting the illegal occupation of the Zionists, not the state of Israel. They have enough missiles to take out Tel aviv, if they wish so.

A human mind can **deal** with infinite data. It can make sense of infinite data in no time, no matter how imperfect it maybe. A neural net cannot deal with infinite data, only countably infinite data, that could be organized, like in chess. [ I know chess is not infinite, but we are relatively speaking here ] Human minds make sense of things with Emotions. We are scared of death, so we had to make sense of things. This emotion is post linguistic which is a bottleneck for machines. All machines do it to process digital information. Humans have intellect and intuition. To make sense of something, you need both in the right balance. Now, neural nets can mimic emotions to some degree, but it will miss out on intellectual part. This is why AI always mess up the fingers on the hands. You cannot give a rule to AI that human hands have five fingers. It does not take rules. It loses out on intellect. To strike the right balance of intuition and intellect, you need intuition and intellect. The correct rules are determined by intuition. But that same rules might take precedence over the intuition. In AI chess that uses neural nets, there is an objective. The AI plays chess with itself and learns and how to reach the objective. This is fine for a specific AI. How would you **teach** a general AI? What is its objective? Humans have emotions and the objective of survival. For AI it is a complicated mess. But who knows quantum computing and analog computing may be able to mimic emotions, but I am skeptical even then.

Cute.

This will invite more consequences than murdering kids.

If you are talking about AGI, then I can assure you thay it will not happen in a million years. If you are talking about something better than the current models but not an AGI, there are stark problems with it as well. At the end of the day, all these algorithms or models or whatever is glorified mathematics and statistics. That right there is the bottleneck of the algorithm. An algorithm is well defined, finite and hence dumb. A finite algorithm cannot predict or give rise to something that could work with the infinite, which is what a brain like Einstein does. That should be pretty obvious. No finite mathematical model can make sense of all the data available to us. TL;DR The bottleneck for models is mathematics and symbols. Humans have a sense making capacity that transcends symbols and mathematics. --------- Which is why the boldest move is to feed in high quality dense data. Feed the model with wise sayings and shit. Then there might be a chance that the models give out high quality output. Even then, don't expect AGI. AGI is a lost cause. We should be building AI for specific use cases with tailor made data. We will soon have no option but to go for it once we have exhausted the theoretical limits for what an algorithm can do.

Leo & JP talking would have been so cool back in 2017. As they grew older thier psyches grew harder too.

@nerdspeak At the end of the day, these countries are indirect beneficiaries of western imperialism. How exactly they managed to do it while simultaneously whitewashing them as a bastion of equality is somewhat complex. The global South does plenty of trade with imperialist states. The difference is that Nordic countries get paid fairly while South gets paid in parity. This wouldn't be the case of the population of the Nordic states were higher. Try implementing social democracy and free healthcare with 500 million people instead of 5 million people. You should appreciate how the former Soviet states actually did managed to have free healthcare and equality for women with relatively high populations. If USSR managed to hold on, these states would have beaten all western states in liberalism and equality for the general populace without criminal exploitation. It's still relatively homogenous compared to the rest of the world. They even did Nazi style ethnic sterilization campaign in the 20th century but managed to whitewash it away that most of the world doesn't know about it. These people are good at whitewashing their tainted past. Ethnic homogeneity means high trust and low polarization making it easier to get stuff done basically. Infinite in this context means they have a surplus that is enough to sustain a couple of generations. If you have a 1000 apples to eat, you have infinite apples from a practical point of view since you will never be able to exhaust it. That's the surplus they get from ripping off from the global South indirectly via trade with imperialist powers. If the imperial powers decide to pay them like they pay the global South, it would be a whole different picture. Labour unions are not that rare as you might think. They still operate in countries with a socialist/communist culture like I do. I don't get the parallel with social democracy and unions. Social programs in capitalist system needs to generate a surplus and thus makes it unviable. Ex Social Security in the US will run out by 2035. Scandinavian countries simply happened to have a surplus for a small populace and that's why it works. To add on top of it.... Labour unions in a capitalist imperial system can backfire real fast. The capitalists would simply move the operations abroad to the global South.

If anyone is serious just completely ignore the "social democratic" model peddled by Sanders. It will not work for 95% of the world. Go for it if your country has - small and ethnically homogeneous population. - unequal exchange with global South. - Tight integration with imperial powers. - Access to infinite natural resources both at home and abroad. "We should go for the Nordic model" is as good as saying everyone should start a business and become rich. It's not even mathematically possible. Yeah man nice guys finish last. USSR played it nice by not bombing the fuck out of the allies of US and restraining themselves, while US went on a full fledged bombing spree, Invasions and coups. USSR messed up with invasion of Afghanistan, but nowhere close to the criminal domination that US engaged in. USSR had to react while US did all the action. The dissolution of the USSR would remain as the greatest of all crimes against humanity, whoever was responsible for it.

20th century was full of war. Socialism will not thrive under wartime and heavy sanctions. Just like Finland will not have gracious social programs if you drop a bunch of bombs on it and sanction it. You have to keep in mind that United States of America after the ww2 went out of their way to overthrow the socialist governments methodologically using everything in their arsenal from covert regime change to dropping bombs on them. How would Japan work under sanctions? How would Finland work under sanctions? How would North Korea work under sanctions? People look at North Korea and say that's socialism and it doesn't work while in reality they were forced to not work by the rest of the world with sanctions. This is not to gloss over the serious problems with socialism like lack of diversification of revenue. But those could be easily fixed. It's remarkable how liberal were the Soviet states even under heavy sanctions. But they were tipped over the threshold by the US and their allies by criminal domination and deceit. I am not a leftist at all. I am right leaning 70% of the time. I am giving credit where it's due.

I don't know if Israel will disintegrate, although the path ahead is bleak. But the Zionist entity certainly will.

You have been consistently denying the detremnetal effects of having lost democracy in countries abroad. When Iran lost it's democracy and plunged into authoritarianism, SD stage regression & corruption, you denied any link between the two. You refuse to give credit for the advancements they made in women's rights as they were "unsustainable". Now you cry every day for America devolving into authoritarianism and losing democracy. It's these subtle contradictions that you throw that piss me off. Well, when my views randomly coincided with leftism, you were quick to dismiss that all as "leftist nonsense" without actually addressing what I have to say. I didn't even notice that what I had to say was leftist frankly. My views were far more sophisticated than what your normal progressive or leftist would say, although the conclusion might be the same. Now how do you feel when someone else dismiss your view as a part of some group? You have been doing it all along. Yes.

The problem with the social democracies and the Nordic model is that they still needed to siphon wealth from the rest of the world for it to have free healthcare and workers rights. It's quite interesting you bought up the case of Romania. Such countries with communist past indeed had free healthcare, education, and higher rates of women joining universities and workforce than their western counter parts. It's a pretty good model to aspire to once again to be honest. And none of this involved imperialism or colonialism and they worked under sever sanctions. Which makes it all the while more impressive. It fared poorly in wartime. Granted. But it was still great for the average worker. A good case study is the impact of 600 million dollar loan package given to Ukraine by the EU in 2013-14, in return for austerity measures. It actually increased the poverty rates in Ukraine and decrease pensions for old people etc. It's a crony capitalist model vs a social model. The contrast between the two models is uncanny.

There will never be an AGI. Even an AGI will not help you actualize. AI will get unfathomably good at specific domains that are well defined, like chess. The more general it gets, the more it deteriorates in quality. --- I don't see anyone solving Energy or Data problem. At the end of the day, AI is as good as the data you send it. Garbage in Garbage out. And energy. Nuclear Fusion is always a couple of decades away. A bold move will be to solve either of these, but we are nowhere close. Love to see someone breaking the deadlock.

That's not how this works. It's not possible to use profound understandings to pick and choose stocks. People make money from the worst stocks and lose money from the best stocks based on how they interact with the market. It's more how you play. Bitcoin is somewhat good, but it's incredibly volatile to be a stable store of value.

@mrPixel Maybe take a break. It was your mistake (and mine too) to somehow keep Leo as an exception to most humans out there and let him be a figure of pristine consciousness or open mindedness or whatever. The delusion is broken and it should have been broken. Welcome to the club. Leo is just another dude on the internet. Always was. It was wrong from our part to hold him to unrealistic expectations, which frankly no one should be held to. Unrealistic expectations will backfire on those who hold them. If that's so, then it's good. It might be better to use your own intellectually original models and ditch flimsy models like SD altogether. If you can independently verify SD, then it's good. Else it's not worth using. My critisism of SD is not that it's a human construction that just fell short. It too weak even for a human construction. EDT is orders of magnitude superior compared to SD. There is no comparison. Do you have any abstract structure or guidelines of what entails a "serious view" ? How would a serious view differentiate it from the crappy views? Or do you determine it entirely based on your whim at the moment.

@Leo Gura My points were general and not pertaining to this thread, although not excluding it either. 95% of the talk might be total crap, but that makes the 5% all the more important and it's on you to differentiate and not put it all in one basket. You can make a case for something from a higher perspective and a lower perspective. They may be arguing for the same exact point, but the reasoning and justifications might be different, at astounding depths. Which is why each person's view must be evaluated for itself and not in the backdrop of something else. If I argue for Trump, which I don't, my reasoning and justifications will be an order of magnitude more serious than your average retarded Maga Trumpers. I want to be heard for what I say and not as if I am a Maga lunatic. ----- Also, I think it's a serious problem that the way you use SD is too narrow. SD itself is a simplistic model only to be made for flimsy purposes. It's not rigorous enough to predict the future or something else of that sort. It's good for making arm chair analysis of the past, since you can always pick and choose. SD is an incomplete model and there is a lot more meat that you can add to it that I don't take it seriously. You don't know what's the actual green looks like. Maybe the SD green that you see now is not really green but an small taste of what's really in store. Actual green can only be made sense in retrospect.

Intersting how Trump is so stage orange that he turns into orange. He is showing his stage of development.

They wanted to make Gaza unlivable for Palestinians.

Yeah Trump is the biggest reaction to having their status quo made fun of.

Damn. Bro did not hold back.