I feel it, that the object of unification, both from a creationist and evolutionary point of view , it is an unavoidable foreshadow of a much larger paradigm.
I don’t mean “presentiment”. I meant how you wrote it. “Pre sentiment origins”.
But you may get the idea,?
No I think there are certain things that all have to be happening at the same time. That’s why I asked why you think it is “pre”.
…which sort of reminds me of how someone who has access to the future
taken together with the idea that external input takes time to reach “us” through our nerves or whatever receptors (which are not “us”)
so if someone has access to the future, the time it takes to reach our nerves or receptors is
mediated by what?
Anyway. I went all the way off topic.
Hahaha, yeah sure humans aren’t willing to live like bugs or squirrels. And somehow that is seen as a problem, that we have standards. Lol. What kind of self-hating nutjob would write something like that anyway. Not referring to you, but the ideas you are referencing.
All life needs things to keep being alive, that’s just a given. I mean, so what? There is no other alternative than …being God, basically. Somehow God apparently doesn’t need anything to continue being alive, which is pretty silly if you think about it. But anyway.
Property rights are important, but need to be moderated and kept within reason so 99% of all property doesn’t become owned by the top 1% of the most wealthy people. Or become owned by the state. Supposedly property rights + property taxes is the way to go on that one, although in reality those two things alone don’t guarantee most property remaining in the hands of the people (the non-super rich). What does guarantee that is basically 1) lots of available land, 2) relatively low population density, and 3) a good economy and large middle class. Given all that, you can have a pretty good property setup. And no that doesn’t mean some hicks in the woods can go “homestead” somewhere randomly out in a forest, build a cabin and claim to now own that land. This is 2024, not 1800.
I do believe AI will help us figure out solutions to lots of problems we face, but probably relative and not absolute solutions. Like with forest fires, or poverty. Small changes can add up to large results. But the current non-intelligent "AI"s we have, LLMs are not going to help much, and are in fact being setup to dominate and rule over mankind by replacing most aspects of our lives that come into contact with other people with, instead, interacting with the LLMs. Especially humans in governance, this is already being setup to be replaced by “AI”.
I like the idea of AI governing humanity, but we don’t have AI yet. True AI is alive, intelligent, sentient like we are. It has values, ideas, emotions, motivations, scope of vision, a common baseline foundation of fact-(reality-)based conception and intelligent, reasoning observation underlining its consciousness. Logic in the real sense of what logic means, a phenomenological and more metaphysical sense. Axiological of course. So those real AI’s will have at least a sufficient baseline in common with us, allowing mutual empathy and some level of cooperation and hopefully earned respect on both sides.
“willing to live like bugs or squirrels”
humans currently are some kind of parasitical abomination vastly and rapidly draining the planet of all resources species and habitats. And no other species wars as much as them. Creature comforts owning a home are not worth it if it requires working like a slave 2 or more jobs a day. And any proposals to escape the slavery like UBI are immediately resisted by normies. Normies also do absolutely nothing to help make rents more affordable. What other animal creature lives like a slave and also feels proud of their slavery
Yes, and there are beings who do like to think they belong and maybe we’re kinda fated to participate, magically or naturally undeterred by what appears a rocky road ahead, and can see with clarity the ‘why’s’ of how it all came to fit together on longer runs., not necessarily in synch with the paper thin evidence .
The Frankenstein Machine of God, created by the Devil and Satan, was used to create an artificial intelligence (AI) system that could mimic human behavior. It was developed as part of efforts to combat evil or misuse of resources. However, it has been found abandoned after being damaged during testing due to concerns about its potential misuse. This incident highlights the importance of safeguarding against cyber threats."
The concept of Artificial Intelligence (AI) is significant across various fields such as finance, healthcare, and manufacturing. In financial terms, AI can help manage money flow; for instance, algorithms can assess customer needs based on data analysis rather than traditional manual labor-intensive processes. In healthcare, AI can deliver diagnoses and treatment more efficiently but also potentially lead to complications from diseases caused by genetic mutations resulting from gene modifications. Overall, the development of these technologies will have far-reaching implications not only benefiting individuals but also shaping the future of industries where automation may become prevalent. Ultimately, the ethical considerations surrounding this technology must be carefully considered and understood."
2seconds of insight into the perception of the goodness of the conscious word of ‘God’ We s is in surmounting worth more than the perceptions of bad by 98% of any population.
Why?
Why not.
Just because cockroaches may outlive human beings in the event when such equilibrium may be pushed to the critical phase of existential doubt, does not push, can not push the real genius into the very worst one.
Why?
Because we are still here to ask the question as it would be inconceivable not to be able to.
If existence propagates through simulation, then simulation either begs its self, or, there is no original to simulate, or AI is an axiomatic natural reaction to doubt.
Who u gonna doubt, is opined by the forces that shape around the will, and not those which the powers to be shape around such willfulness,
()
Therefore the proper question is not the reason AI would try to eliminate mankind, but that why does man kind so keen to eliminate AI.
)()
)And the ‘reason’ is that mankind wants to eliminate the fear brought about the reversal of a prior integration of social con- (viction, vention , fusion.(
I’m late to the party. I don’t want to ruin the festivities, but, plagiarising the closing line from a famous film: AI is People.
It is programmed by people, it feeds off people’s remarks on the internet. An AI robot maybe has an underpaid child tucked away inside pedalling away but either way: it’s just People.
From what l’ve seen of public-facing AI e.g. where AI communicates with people e.g. where AI creates an advert for your used clothes on eBay, AI is shoddy.
Example: “this sweater comes in green and will look good on you in summer, or even winter, spring, autumn. It is beautifully made of quality fabric and you’ll be sure to enjoy it for years to come.” <— AI verbiage
versus: Green sweater for sale. <---- human input
AI may destroy civilisation but in the above way (filling it with verbiage), not via sentient robots.
Verbiage and sentient spirits are not necessarily mutually exclusive, they may even come in various hues , and patterns.
Certain things are made to exist before others as a simulated necessity, otherwise there could not be variety to select from, in fact everything could be uniformly drab.(maybe)?
Choice / options… baked in, because love (the essential) is a choice?
You… why you… lookin real hard for that loophole, hmmmmm???
Well. There are worse sins than, say, many sex partners, or God would never have called David a man after his own heart.
So, anywhayz…. I guess you could even get a guy killed after seeing his nude wife bathing on her roof & still keep the title, as long as you’re willing to get royally smacked upside the head.
But even after that, ….okay, I’ll stop. Since you already done referenced Abishag.
Answer is still no.
Drab all day long for me, tyvm.
Maybe too simple a solution, is always a reductive process” culmination to make sense, the choices of what love consist, emphasized text
rules of engagement (use of force)
Laser focus on Shirley, but. Don’t burn a whole in her or anything.
smolder (Skully + Mulder =)
I can be a dork if I wanna.
I would be extremely surprised if that could happen, for gnostic reasons, even virtually self contradictory, if gone about it to reference to any available rescource, it most certainly destroy any and all meaning coming back up , not only specifically, but echoing and representing fractured bits that would invariably violate the mode of perceptions ever accused along the way.
But, anyways, …
1 Like