Carl-Richard

Lol, when I had the thought above, I thought about of course PsychedSubstance (I think) and also Quentin Experiment (and also Dakota Of Earth). But I was also a bit puzzled why I had the thought as it didn't quite make sense that I would put these last two under "trauma dumping" (although Quentin Experiment did talk about taking his break and becoming a dad and it was very personal, but still, it didn't quite fit to me as "trauma dumping"). That said, I haven't watched much Dakota Of Earth either, you could probably find something there, but anyways, I couldn't find the connection. Anyways, the fact that my thought didn't seem quite logical (it basically only applied to PsychedSubstance alone, which wouldn't really warrant a generalization like that), in hindsight might have been a sign that it was something external I was picking up on and not some intuitive insight born out of seeing connections within my own mind (as they tend to be experienced as significant because they are quite logical or profound in how they connect different things). I think you @Natasha Tori Maru have commented on this that when you suspect an externally sourced thought, (I believe you said) there is a lack of logic behind them (?), or at least there is something off, like a disjunction, like a sort of randomness in how it occurs. If simply the latter, that would be consistent with what you @Oppositionless are describing with how you have never talked about him before that (and it's consistent with the three original dreams I wrote about in the thread; they seemingly popped out of nowhere, seemed highly deviant compared to the usual dreams).

Last night, I had a dream that I was being chased by several tornadoes. Then today I read about the tornado incident in Kentucky with an estimated death toll of 100 people, which is the worst tornado event in the history of Kentucky. About two weeks ago, I had a dream where PsychedSubstance got kicked out from his own house. Today he released this video: The night my dad's boss died from drowning, I had a nightmare where I was being chased by a ghost, fearing for my life. I usually never have those types of nightmares. What is this?

Bro I swear to god, earlier today when I was vacuuming or making breakfast, I had the thought pop into my head "YouTube channels about psychedelics eventually just turn into trauma dumping channels" for some reason. Then 7 minutes ago, this was posted: This is crazy, if you don't understand, read the original post. I've already had a specific premonition about PsychedSubstance (and that time it was also about his housing situation? 🫥🫠). @Natasha Tori Maru

Only one report in my city from 20 years ago 🥲

Bro, who's "fearing" AI here?

I predict that won't happen until the other areas of AI research integrate with (or overtake) LLMs. If you simply keep refining a wax figure, you will just have a more impressive wax figure. Humans move, they are concerned about survival, they adapt to their surroundings in real time, they make agentic decisions, they are autonomous, self-sustaining, self-building, they have a thirst for knowledge, they ask questions, they don't just respond to someone pushing a button or through connecting them to a network of computer scripts. Anything that has a push-to-start function, that doesn't talk back to you essentially unprovoked or independent of clearly defined constraints, and sits idly by inside a non-portable data center, will most certainly have limitations that reflect that. The day you fear that AI will be able to come into your home and murder you like Ted Bundy, that is maybe when you will truly have trouble distingushing AI text from human text. But even so, we can distinguish people we know based on personality. Ted Bundy has a certain personality, we can distinguish him, even though he is a human (escaping "he's an animal/predator" descriptions); I've for example identified previously banned forum users on new accounts through text multiple times. Maybe AI will inescapably have a certain personality that you can pick out.

I think a good heuristic for diagnosing someone as a "thinker" vs a "feeler" is how often they say "because". Because it indicates the use of logical thinking. "I think this because this is connected to this, and this is this, therefore this is this. Why? Because this is this. And because this is this, this is this." etc. If you are a feeler, you are more likely to just say a sentence and then let it stand on its own. It doesn't need further elaboration, because it's just what you feel. It didn't come from a deep systematic process of going from one thing to the next. Maybe you could derive the process after the fact (and perhaps that would indicate or give more evidence that it would be a more consistent or "true" feeling), but the process you arrived there was through feeling. In that sense, feeling need not be devoid of "logic", but it's devoid of conscious use of logic (logic as a declarative process). It can in a way be a shortcut to a logical process, but you have less ability to be aware of it and perhaps test if it's sound. You can of course be feeling in an inconsistent way and that would be what people usually look down on feelers for, but it may not necessarily be the case; it could depend on how accurate or attuned your feeling is. And the way feeling works is it's semantic rather than syntactic. You judge primarily by its pure holistic quality, not by relationship to other qualities. But ironically, a feeling can therefore contain syntax (relationship between parts) because you can feel the whole as a quality. If something is coherent, if there is consistency between the parts, you can feel it. That's how you can judge whether something is coherent with your values or not (without stating your values declaratively). You can simply feel whether there is coherence. Perhaps there is also a feeling element to whether one logical conclusion follows from the premises declaratively. But then, the distinction between a feeler and a thinker is how often or how many connections you "feel" (again, declaratively).

"Because" might be a good example but in general you want to look at the use of certain connective prepositions (e.g. thus, therefore, if, so, then). And the more (or less) connected (e.g. if->then->therefore) the better.

Try to weather balloon yourself out of that one.

14:39 What the fuck is that

@PsychedelicEagle Leo looks like some stock bald guy lmao. And it looks like he is wearing a grey yamaka.

There can't be syntax/structure without semantics/content, so there can't be logic without feeling Perhaps a good mix. I don't divide people neatly into feelers and thinkers (I'm a statistician, ya know), but there are moments or cases where you have the thought "that's a feeler thing to say" or "that's a thinker thing to say". I was prompted to write this topic by watching how Sam Hyde describes why he started believing in God and stopped being an atheist (it struck me as very "feeler" like, and wouldn't you know it, people on Personality Database seem to agree, those in comments who provided arguments at least). You can also observe this on the forum. Notice how some people are prone to leaving statements "hanging" and then either proceeding to a new statement or simply refusing to elaborate at all. I will add though that raising your "awareness" (or consciousness) is in a sense a semantic (and thus interestingly feminine) quality. It makes your experience more consistent, more holistic, more interconnected, more united, more One, a single whole, a single quality. Meanwhile, raising say your analytic ability (be it through increased working memory capacity or declarative pattern recognition ≈ IQ) is more syntactic (and also more masculine), concerned about structure, about dividing things up into parts and indeed analyzing them. So someone who is spiritually inclined in the mystical sense of being connected to awareness or presence would definitely be more connected to feeling, but I would say not necessarily in a way that closes them off from thinking. The idea behind MBTI types is that you have certain "go-to" strategies (because you just go with what you're best at, or what works most of the time, or what you're the most used to, more often than the alternative), and therefore you would naturally be slanted either towards feeling or thinking. But you can definitely train either side quite substantially as well depending on your focus, and you can also be supremely gifted such that you're slanted to one side but your other side is also way above average. That could be the case for Buddha.

"I just follow the dietary recommendations from the national institute of public health; they have 1000s of scientists that have done more research and better research than I could ever do".

@Natasha Tori Maru Yeah that's yeah. Yeah. 😵‍💫

What have I spawned My NatashaGPT prompt is too powerful.

Authentic high heels to nutsack, no AI can recreate.

Long time no see. I was thinking about you. Spoken as the most heterosexual man to have ever heterosexualed.

I'm gay. No.

Calling AI text perfection is like calling a vax figure of Brad Pitt perfection.

It writing out text that makes me puke is all I need to know it's not real.

Try the technique in the video. I recently thought about it as a potential treatment method for akathisia and other movement disorders. It has a way of balancing (quite literally through bilateral symmetry) and gently channeling one's energy into smooth movements which could be helpful for exorcising anxious stuck-up energy.

? Try it.

The concept of a male escort, especially a high-rated one, is really fascinating. Notice the personality type. Notice the social status, the philosophy and values, the type of interactions that women want out of it. They (the good ones) seem like highly caring, sensitive heroes.

I mean does he suffer now with his current behavior (e.g. while maintaining his Blueprint protocol)? Does he feel it's a problem that is negatively impacting his life in some way? Even if he hasn't commented on this specifically, what would you guess? To me, there is a distinction between say a Howie Mandel ("I don't feel in control of my thoughts") and Bryan Johnson "we will conquer mortality". I guess unless he is so much in denial and blind to his own mental life that anything he says about his mental state is inaccurate, it would probably be hard to label it a "mental disorder", but perhaps again "personality disorder" is possible.

It's ok, go marry a mannequin. Yes, there is a tension between the benefits and utility of AI and it invading and corrupting every human domain. That's the problem.