Leo's Blog: Infinite Insights — Page 15
I have an episode called Learning = Making Distinctions, in which I explain how to super-charge the rate and depth of your learning by consciously focusing on making sharper distinctions.
If you study the mechanics of how these powerful new AIs are trained, it's exactly by this method! AIs are trained using sharp, clear, distinct data-sets. For example, you feed an AI 1000 clear images of dogs and 1000 clear images of cats, and it will learn how to distinguish them. If the data-set is murky or ambiguous, the AI will not learn well. Your mind works in the same way.
One of the things that makes learning anything difficult is that no one gives you enough clear, sharp, unambiguous examples. Much of the labor of learning is finding these distinct examples out of all the crap humans feed you. One of the biggest parts of AI research and development is to use humans to curate very clear data-sets. For example, if you want to train a Tesla car to avoid driving over children, you have to curate a data-set of 1000s of videos of children running across the street. Then it will learn to recognize or distinguish children. Otherwise it won't.
Which is why I fill my episodes with dozens and hundreds of excellent examples. I rack my mind to come up with the best examples for you. Because I know I need to train you like a neural network.
A neural network is a massive set of distinctions that mirrors the infinite set of distinctions that we call Reality.
I just explained the metaphysics of AI.
Good little intro:
The trouble with Post-Modernism is that it's both brilliant and stupid at the same time. It contains some extremely profound truths about relativity, however is also badly misuses them and overlooks the existence of Absolute Truth, Consciousness, and stages of development.
This issue is too complicated to elucidate here. I will have a future video which I discuss the limits and problems of Post-Modernism. For now I'll just say this: There are two traps with Post-Modernism: one is to reject it, the other is to subscribe to it.
I suggest you research Post-Modernism a bit on your own and contemplate where it gets reality right and where it gets it wrong. This is a good exercise in critical thinking. Think it through for yourself rather than just listening to 2nd hand opinions.
What is the proper way to hold and apply relativism? And what are the excesses and misuses of relativism? That's what this whole issue boils down to. It is not easy to answer this question accurately. It takes serious contemplation. But give it a shot before you hear my answers. I don't want you to just believe me.
It's extremely fascinating how these art AIs work under the hood. They've basically figured out how to generate deep abstraction.
The ability for Consciousness to do abstraction is one of the most profound things. Human's don't understand how profound abstraction is. This stuff has metaphysical implications which one one comprehends. Contemplate: What is abstraction and how is it possible?
Read the following article from one of the world's top AI researchers:
The first time I heard this I idea I thought it was overblown. But the more I started thinking about it, the more my mind opened up to it. Maybe we are moving ahead too fast. I don't know. I'm just sharing this to make you think for yourself.
Share your thoughts on the Actualized Forum.
This is very good:
I wish Jordan Peterson stuck to teaching psychology rather than politics. He's really good at psychology. But hey... I'm sure many people would say the same thing about me.
Has my work been made worse by my forays into political topics? I would say no. But then again, I'm biased. I'm sure JP would say the same about himself. Why do we both feel a need to talk about politics when it turns people off? We both believe we're saving the world. Everyone believes his work is saving the world. Isn't that funny? And yet, I would feel negligent if I didn't speak about politics. Which is exactly what I'm sure JP would say. So here we are. The only question is, Which one of us is more self-deceived?
For most of my life I've been a relatively agreeable person. I've always hated conflict with people. But in order to attain my recent insane awakenings I've had to become much more disagreeable with people, especially online, where interactions are asymmetrically anonymous. People know me so deeply from my work, but I don't know them at all. Which is why I've been acting a bit strange lately. It was a necessary part of my process to achieve the sovereignty of mind necessary to transcend all human understanding. You're not gonna cut through all the human spiritual bullshit that's out there by being agreeable.
I don't enjoy being disagreeable. It's painful to me. But I would rather be disagreeable and have Truth than be agreeable and full of human shit. So I endure the pain. This work ain't easy. You have to be very careful with agreeableness, niceness, and politeness. People will abuse it. Ignorant and selfish people will takes advantage of your generosity. And the devil will use it against you to flood your mind with bullshit and group-think. The devil LOVES spineless people with no boundaries because they are ripe for seduction and corruption. Being too nice can ruin your whole life if you're not careful. That's how serious this issue is. I have to keep myself isolated from humans and their activities in order to avoid getting corrupted and distracted. One of the most important parts of my work is making sure that it doesn't get co-opted by human games, as that is the default.
Then again, this is not license to be a stingy, bitter, isolated, jerk. You need to find a balance where you are firm yet kind, generous, and loving. It's not easy to strike that balance. It takes a lot of practice and experience in dealing with people and their games, and a serious commitment to your own values. By being too agreeable you let others trample on your values. Sometimes a bit of conflict is necessary for a higher purpose. But you have to be careful not to abuse this tool. It's not worth being disagreeable unless something crucial is at stake. For me, that's Understanding.
This is some beautiful footage of Bernie Sanders putting the CEO of Starbucks to shame.
This asshole owns a $100 million yacht. Yet he still works his damnedest to illegally prevent workers from unionizing and getting higher wages. Well, that's how he earns his yacht. Where does he think that yacht came from? The pockets of employees.
Howard Shultz is completely full of shit. And I don't necessarily mean that he's lying. I mean he's so self-deceived with corporate culture and self-bias that he actually believes his own bullshit.
If you truly care about curbing the toxic excesses of corporate power, this is how it's done, by the left wing, NOT the right! This is how you know that right-wing populism is bullshit. No right-wing politician would ever stand up to the CEO of Starbucks like this and defend worker's rights. Someone like Trump or his ilk would NEVER do this. They don't have enough integrity to do it!
Right-wing populism is bullshit. It solves nothing. It's just a distraction from the real issues. Which is why they run around crying about pedophiles, Jews, trans, and CRT. All that is just a red herring from dealing with economic corruption.
The union-busting that corporations like Starbucks and Amazon engage in is not just illegal but utterly shameless. The one thing all these CEOs do is try to fuck over every worker they can. And then they sit there with a straight face and try to deny it. It's their job to squeeze their workers of every penny. This is what's so toxic about current business practices. This needs to change.
This is the real problem of "elites". They have bullshitted themselves so deeply that they do not comprehend the damage their actions have on society at large. It's not that they're evil or lazy, they are just blinded by self-bias, corporate group-think, and Wall Street pressure.
In-depth explanation of the mechanics of how ChatGPT works:
(Warning: this one is pretty technical)