Nilsi

I dont need a "grand narrative generator," when I can just go out and meet my needs. Do you make as much money as you want to? Fuck the kind of girl you would like to? Get the respect from your peers you know you deserve? Be acknowledged for your creative contributions?... Doesnt take a genius to figure out how to meet those needs. But, by all means, keep shuffling jargon around in your Platonic dreamworld.

Exactly. You are lost in fantasyland, while I'm out here actually meeting my needs. And then you have the audacity to preach to me about your grand narrative, which supposedly will meet all of humanities needs. Ridiculous!

That's precisely what I was saying. Now that's gibberish. You're using the term "grand narrative" in a very idiosyncratic way.

As washed up as he is nowadays - peak Drake was in a league of his own.

You presented a thesis on why we need a "grand narrative" to meet human needs. I presented a thesis on why there are infinite possible narratives to meet those needs.

Thats a complex question. Many human needs (e.g. recognition, belonging, self-actualization...) can be met in a plethora of ways. The only thing Im opposing is offering one way to meet these needs to the detriment of alternatives.

Nice!

Again, I never suggested such a thing. There are certain rules that apply to all members of a category (e.g. humans need water to survive). The problems start when you push this too far, as Mr. Carl wants to do, and try to formalize all of culture into a universal set of rules (aka religion). Im an avid follower of discoveries in neuroscience and biology and Im extremely strict and scientific with my health. I do have to choose what metric I want to improve as far as nutrition, exercise, supplementation etc. goes. Optimizing for testosterone and energy is often directly antagonistic to optimizing for longevity, for example. Im not suggesting that eating junk food is as good as eating a raw whole food vegan diet - what I am suggesting is that there are alternatives to the vegan diet, that are just as "scientifically rigorous," but get marginalized when too big a consensus builds around one particular local maximum and group think starts running wild.

I never suggested that I don't have a hierarchy of values. All I'm saying is, that there isn't some universal Jacobs Ladder. I'm all for Ken Wilber's integral theory, because it works quite well - that doesn't make it true though -- and it certainly doesn't mean, we should accommodate our whole reality to fit this particular framework.

Tate attracts people that lean towards psychopathy - as do you.

The bioshphere (or Gaia, if you want) is an autonomous superorganism and is simultaneously acting through individual organisms. There will be incorporeal AGI, but you will be jacked into it and partake in it. Its no different from how God works, really.

Hes a unique character, who pursued his dreams to the end. As far as Im concerned, Hitler was a net positive to society.

What if the highest Love doesnt care about your feelings?

Probably photoshopped as hell, but this is such a beautiful picture.

Musk is already doing it with Neuralink. I think they start human trials this year. Not that hard to imagine going from that to connecting it to AGI. What do you think this is all leading up to? Ask any silicon valley tech nut and they will tell you that thats what they are ultimately working towards.

Right. I'd rather implant it into anyone brain and embed it into supply chains and things like that - then it's at least in part human.

I feel like the biggest thing is building the right infrastructure to embed AI in. If it remains some incorporeal superintelligence, it's way more likely to just brush over life, as if it's nothing. Again, not sure that's really true. There certainly is an argument to be made for keeping it as far away from our infrastructure as possible, to avoid catastrophe.

I have no idea. Maybe it will lead to mutually assured destruction and a stalemate. I'm down for the race though, to be honest

Assuming we can deliberately steer the development of AI - the West has way better scientists, so we just need to keep outracing them and use our more powerful AI to check theirs. Assuming we can't deliberately steer AI - they won't be able to use it for their malevolent intents and all is good. Not saying that's necessarily how it works, but at least it's imaginable.

I get it, but it will never happen. I grew up with the prospect of AGI always at the periphery of my mind and so did all the people working in these tech companies - just pulling the plug from this dream won't fly. We should redouble our efforts on understanding AI and coming up with human aligned applications for it - this technophobia doesn't help anyone.

Let's not kid ourselves here, the highest value is God, of course. The only question is how one goes after this value, which is where I maintain, there is no algorithm or universal narrative for it. Some "mystics" are so malnourished and poor that they barely stay alive. Some "mystics" are yoked as fuck and wear designer clothes (shout-out to Mr. Wilber). Someone may need to put a gun to their head, to get closer to the "highest value." Someone else may need to become a Wallstreet hustler. The next guy may need to find a girlfriend. Who is to say?

Alhamdulillah.

New Lana record slaps.

You know how they say "look at the philosopher, if you want to know what this philosophy will do to you." I feel the same way about vegans and people eating plant burgers. 9/10 times they are meek, unattractive, unintelligent, uninspired, unsuccessful people - yet they are so righteous about knowing whats "healthy." Look at some carnivore and animal based guys and you will find the exact inverse. If postmodernism and psychoanalysis have taught us anything, its that this is far from being a trivial point. But people will deny this and quote some stupid scientific papers of course. Which is really the same level of irony as a fundamentalists claiming that God exists, because it says so in the bible.

I dont. In your case a procedure might be dropping out of college. For someone else it might be going to evening school, getting a high school degree and signing up for college. Whatever makes you less ignorant, is what I would prescribe. Hate to be that guy, but its all relative. Exactly this is my problem with religion and grand narratives. They make lowest common denominator prescriptions and with that domesticate entire populations of people. Isnt it obvious that this can never work? Its the same problem with AI alignment. In fact, its literally the infamous Gödels incompleteness theorem. Fair. In practice that means shedding all distinctions and beliefs. To you God is some event at the end of time. Thats fine. But God is also an experience, that actually happens - like having to take a shit. I might not have to take a shit now, but I did this morning. And the next time I do, I will recognize the feeling again. I dont need a grand narrative to make myself take a shit, when I feel like having to take a shit. Not necessarily. I dont have any meaningful definition for mysticism - to me precisely that is spirituality.