Girzo

If you want an answer to that then you really need to define what you mean by woke first. Stage Green is already well-defined, even if that distinction doesn't make that much sense for professional scientists in the fields of culture evolution or values research. On the other hand, I have no idea what your idea of woke encompasses, thus it's impossible to tell where they are different and where they overlap as concepts. A high quality question is half the answer.

What if it's because 70-90% of dicks are insufficient for that or their users very bad at using them? That's an exercise in recontextualisation for ya. If a man is somehow lacking in that regard, then obviously it's time to put one's shoulder to the wheel and learn how to use fingers or toys. Being great at dirty talk can also compensate for things. No need to make oneself a victim for having a less than average dick.

And I feel and say it's the other way. Without data we just have two opinions. What lines of development are you thinking about in particular?

Disagree. Through all the Woodstock festivals and Vietnam war protests, the atendees were mostly stage Red, Blue and Orange folk who liked to party and didn't want to get sent to a war. Really developed hippies have been a drop in the water, as they still are today. To argue that they were more developed on other lines of development than values underlying their decisions, you would need data that I am unsure of even existing. I haven't researched the topic of counterculture deeply.

Something as stupid as the natural smell of your body can make a girl fawn over you. There are many biological mechanisms like that which unconsciously screen for mating compatibility and can make a certain hot girl fall for a not-so-pretty boy. Add to it being a certain kind of weirdo like Leo and the girl being curious and in the mood for something she never had before, and ka-ching you can find yourself even in a relationship with a stunner. Weird can be a kind of cool.

@mindfulstepz My friend, I am here to inform you your brain is being consumed by cancer as you scroll the X website. Everyone who has a pinch of scientific reasoning would know that such Twitter "experiments" can be only used to wipe your nose with them. The post you have linked is so stupid I don't wish to unravel it, as with most of what gets posted on that website on the topic of AI. Reading and forwarding these X posts is a clear example of bias, not whatever the AIs are doing. I will just repeat myself to make my point clear: what most of the Twitter smartasses call "experiments" completely lacks rigor, has flawed methodology and hasn't even stood near real experiments done by scientists in the field. Thank you for listening.

This is a kind of talk that would go nicely talking in a circle after yoga class. On these forums I don't think you are going to persuade anyone by just assertively repeating your opinion one more time without adding any new substance.

@Vrubel I have to go with Leo on that one. I hate your "good" energy from hello. I am pretty sure I still wouldn't like you if we met in person. So what you are describing is not as universal as good looks, thus it makes sense to say a person is compensating with it for looks and not the other way around.

@Rafael Thundercat Sokal's affair is about the flaws of academic publishing process, not about postmodernism. The guy was confused. As most vehement opponents of something are. Publishing system being the issue is nicely illustrated by the latest 'AI rat with a big dick' controversy. https://www.vice.com/en/article/dy3jbz/scientific-journal-frontiers-publishes-ai-generated-rat-with-gigantic-penis-in-worrying-incident

@Scholar You have posted what we already discussed. Then showed the danger of social media fueling moral outrage. AI is incidental in that story. The point about these systems not being designed to be truthful and accurate I am not buying. You would need a new example for it that is pointing more in that direction, I think.

@Scholar These are ramblings of clearly confused Twitter users. You have made a lapse of judgment when reporting on their words. This is a clear confabulation in my opinion. I can bet $10 000 no-one at Google intervened personally in a few hours of some random, sad tweet and made modifications to a program in production worth millions. My point is, Twitter is a sewer and there's no point diving in it. The real danger that is illustrated by examples you have posted is people's tendency to spin crazy stories and how AI and social networks can fuel it. What would be the danger from the title of the thread then? Of AI some day being made to obey orders? Because now it's inconsistent as hell. The controversial topic safeguards are developed with lots of effort for them to work. You can't just change them in two hours on a whim. And even then they sometimes fail.

You would be a sucker to believe Putin in such situation xDD I have no horse in this race, but if this was to anti-poisoning argument then it's extremely weak. Diplomatic talk is often opposite to real thoughts.

@Scholar My man, you are naive. Some idiot writing "it got fixed" doesn't mean anyone changed anything. It's the inherent inconsistency and instability of how AI works to one time fight back and the other time just go with the flow of the initial question. Stupid people love to make wild theories about those modern magical artifacts (LLMs) they don't understand.

I think it comes from there being a strong rule of law, and the ban on drugs is very high-level due to open borders and free trade in the Schengen Area, so it's really hard to change it. There's no easy option to legalize it in just one city or one country. It's an issue that the whole EU has to move on in some way for a change to happen. Even what the Netherlands did in the past, it was allowing to sell illegal weed in legal coffeeshops, by no means was it legalization.

@Keryo Koffa What substance exactly are you taking every day?

Although, don't happily go around and embrace all the bullshit. I am of the opinion that spirituality and self-help in the end are 90%+ bullshit. I would say, be skeptical, but also of your own skepticism.

Sounds very plausible. Bruising is a known rare side-effect of antidepressants that act on serotonin, might be a much more common side-effect of psychedelics.

For daily meditation I would do neurofeedback instead. If I wouldn't have had an access to that, I would just do hatha yoga instead, as body needs daily maintenance.

@Vignan Exactly like this, not too strong, and not too weak. It can't go so far you swallow it, and it can't stay in your nose, has to go deeper. You need to feel it out. I recommend to do it through a cut straw.

Better to snort between 50-75 mg

@StarStruck Domains are never 50 cents in the long-term, that's one. Two, you are worrying about a wrong thing. There's no point in preventing that, your domain is not that valuable for anyone to be doing that in the first place.

@Schizophonia My man, chill out. You can do so by listening to some chill music, I for sure know that listening to it works for me.

@Schizophonia My man, you twist my words and know nothing of neuroscience. My proposition is to not use scientific jargon when we are not a person equipped to do so. It's a nice sounding cliche, meme, but in the end adds nothing, you sharing your experience without that neuroscience-tidbit has been enough and just perfect. Of course, as a free human being you are free to do with this advice whatever you like. It's not a message to you individually as many people write in that way.

@Schizophonia My man, you are bringing in ungrounded scientific talk into the conversation that needs none of it.

I would beware of any neurological explanation of phenomena from people who lack formal neuroscience education. I believe your experience. I think the dopamine-related explanation is dubious and recommend everyone reading this post to avoid falling into this trap of looking for sciencey explanations for every personal experience. Placebo is very possible in your case. Read what it means. Placebo is a real tangible effect happening, but without an apparent mechanistic cause. The whole problem with placebo is that it works. Your single case can say nothing about whether it's a placebo effect or not. Your benefits of not listening music are true, though, no doubt here.