Leo's Blog Discussion Mega-Thread

[vibv]

5 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Glad you liked it. I nearly didn't post it cause I thought no one would care.

I read (almost) all of your blog posts. They've been on fire lately.

[Sincerity]

8 hours ago, Davino said:

My jaw dropped

Can't help but being a genius

I remember a long time ago Leo mentioned opening with "I hate Facebook!". I still think about this fucking line to this day and laugh to myself

Same energy 

Edited October 22, 2024 by Sincerity

[Princess Arabia]

Here I am thinking Better Help was a conscious efficient service. I've seen channels I followed in the past advertising their services. They are getting bigger, and more successful, I guess, so here comes the corruptions. 

Youtube Ads are changing too. Now, it's two and sometimes you can't even skip. They have gotten much bigger and popular over the years. You're right @Leo GuraThe Devil is a marketer. It's amazing how it works. It's genius.

[Yimpa]

Here is the proper way to do philosophy and spirituality:

I LOVE corruption and the Devil!!!

[Past-Philosopher-562]

I understand that many people customize Leo's teachings to suit their own needs, but I have a genuine question: how do you approach and integrate his teachings? I recognize that integration is part of the yellow stage, tier 2 thinking, so I’m curious about your methods. It seems that Leo’s ideas and concepts stem from his awareness and evolution through different stages of ego development. Would it be fair to say that a productive way to engage with his work is to study the nine stages of ego development and reflect on how to integrate each one? As you do this, you might find connections to ideas in his other videos. His concepts often feel like they’re woven together in a complex web, with the nine stages serving as a central framework that helps make sense of everything, ultimately guiding us toward meta-rationality and greater self-awareness.

[enchanted]

https://www.actualized.org/insights/actualized-quotes-077

 

[enchanted]

 

On 22/10/2024 at 5:33 AM, Leo Gura said:

Glad you liked it. I nearly didn't post it cause I thought no one would care.

We care alot about your work  @Leo Gura keep posting cool stuff.

Edited October 24, 2024 by enchanted

[Nemra]

@Leo Gura, you have shared on your blog that you don't watch YouTube videos from the beginning to the end without skipping.

Have you thought about feeding the transcript to the AI and chatting with it as if you were interacting with the video?

[Leo Gura]

7 hours ago, Nemra said:

Have you thought about feeding the transcript to the AI and chatting with it as if you were interacting with the video?

I don't see the point.

[Nemra]

12 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I don't see the point.

One case would be to ask a specific question and get an answer based on the transcript.

[r0ckyreed]

36 minutes ago, Nemra said:

One case would be to ask a specific question and get an answer based on the transcript.

Rewatch his video on Authority. You all are turning AI into your Messiah.

[Nemra]

6 minutes ago, r0ckyreed said:

Rewatch his video on Authority. You all are turning AI into your Messiah.

Rewatch his "Assumptions is the Mother of all Fuck-ups" and "How Openmindedness Works", but more than 5 times.

Edited October 24, 2024 by Nemra

[Leo Gura]

50 minutes ago, Nemra said:

One case would be to ask a specific question and get an answer based on the transcript.

Very few YT videos warrant such work.

[Nemra]

4 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Very few YT videos warrant such work.

I agree.

I meant the videos that are educational and focused on explaining a subject.

[Davino]

@ryandesreu It was a thought experiment to exemplify his first statement. Truth must be the bedrock of healthy government. Then he states: "Imagine [...]"

It's clear that such policy is out of touch with severe application and legislation, Leo gets this. Although fact checks and things of these kind could be more heavily implemented. The example is quite good in pointing the deepness and entanglement of lies, power and corruption. Which is the meta lesson beyond the particular example to contemplate.

[Socrates]

Actualized Quotes #078

This is a great idea but let's address the relativity of the situation, you can't tell if someone is intentionally lying or just misinformed and there is a high level of difficulty if you want to enforce that. Also, notice that every tool that can be used for the collective good can be used for someone to abuse the system and be used to discriminate. That is why the government first needs to become airtight in terms of structure, efficiency, and honesty and then get that much power so someone can face consequences based on something they said.

If this was already in place I could easily see scammy Republicans like Trump co-opt it to gain a political edge and witch-hunt their opponents. At the end of the road, the ideal government needs to have the least amount of "human factor" possible since the human is a flawed being that is inherently self-biased and can't act without being affected by self-interest.

[Davino]

Let's see historical examples of applications of such policies.

Quote

Governments often start with what they perceive as legitimate concerns about social harmony, national security, and protecting truth, which eventually evolve into systems of control.

• The Ottoman Empire's early printing press regulations (16th century) began as religious protection - ensuring sacred texts weren't misrepresented. However, this evolved into a comprehensive system controlling all printed materials, effectively creating a state monopoly on "legitimate" knowledge.
• Ming Dynasty China's "Literary Inquisition" started as a scholarly effort to maintain "correct" Confucian interpretation and cultural purity. Officials genuinely believed they were protecting society from dangerous ideas. Over time, it became a tool for prosecuting any writing that could be interpreted as criticism of the state.
• In colonial Spain, the Inquisition's book censorship began partly from genuine religious concern about theological truth and spiritual well-being. The censors often saw themselves as protecting people from dangerous falsehoods. This system expanded to control all aspects of intellectual life.
• The Soviet case is particularly interesting - many early Bolsheviks genuinely believed they were creating a system to protect workers from bourgeois propaganda and help people understand "scientific socialism." Glavlit officials often saw themselves as educators rather than censors. This idealistic mission transformed into systematic suppression of any alternative viewpoints.
• In Fascist Italy, Mussolini's MinCulPop (Ministry of Popular Culture) started with the concept of protecting Italian cultural "authenticity" and "truth" from foreign corruption. Many intellectuals initially supported it as a project of cultural renewal. It became a comprehensive propaganda machine.

The fascinating pattern is how these systems often begin with:

1. Genuine belief in protecting some form of truth or social good
2. Initial support from intellectuals and cultural figures
3. Self-perception as educators rather than censors
4. Conviction that they're protecting people from harmful ideas
5. Gradual mission creep from specific concerns to total control

Over time, they typically evolve to include:

1. Creation of bureaucracies whose existence depends on finding "threats"
2. Expansion of what constitutes dangerous/prohibited content
3. Development of increasingly sophisticated justifications
4. Shift from protecting specific truths to controlling all truth
5. Transformation of protectors into prosecutors

It would be interesting to contemplate how it could be done practically speaking in the US for example. Just as a thought experiment

[JosephKnecht]

2 hours ago, Socrates said:

This is a great idea but let's address the relativity of the situation, you can't tell if someone is intentionally lying or just misinformed and there is a high level of difficulty if you want to enforce that. Also, notice that every tool that can be used for the collective good can be used for someone to abuse the system and be used to discriminate. That is why the government first needs to become airtight in terms of structure, efficiency, and honesty and then get that much power so someone can face consequences based on something they said.

You used to have much better ideas, Socrates. What happened?   

Quote

Only the philosopher, therefore, is qualified to rule, as only the philosopher has knowledge of the absolute truth and is able to apply this knowledge for the good of the state.  The Republic - Plato

Quote

Socrates then acknowledges that many philosophers are indeed corrupt, but attributes this to the fact that they are brought up in a corrupt society. Only in the ideal state will a philosopher be able to achieve his full potential, "and be the saviour of his country, as well as of himself". The Republic - Plato

I think now is the right time for a philosopher king.

[Yimpa]

https://www.actualized.org/insights/actualized-quotes-078

Edited October 26, 2024 by Leo Gura

[Socrates]

@JosephKnecht These ideas are more up-to-date

1 hour ago, JosephKnecht said:

Only the philosopher, therefore, is qualified to rule, as only the philosopher has knowledge of the absolute truth and is able to apply this knowledge for the good of the state.  The Republic - Plato

This is the exact fundamental premise in my mind when I end up with that precise solution I mentioned.

The fact is that real philosophers will never be elected to positions of power in such an underdeveloped and cognitively impaired society hence the best we can do is minimize the human factor.

Not to mention that democracy will always retard the progress of a nation, meritocracy would be ideal but a sick society has a flawed perspective of what is actual skill and understanding.