Nah, hundreds of years ago people had WAY more time to just think, there were no alarm clocks, people were aligned with their natural circadian rhythm, the vast majority of work was simple labor, whether it was a man chopping wood or a woman washing the linens, human life was far more natural for our species, most people today in the first world have absolutely no clue how unnaturally complicated and hectic their lives are, it's the complete opposite of laziness being the problem, most people have hardly any time to just EXIST and not have to spend mental energy on anything for a while, when they do get those couple hours to just sit and relax, they are too mentally exhausted for some wondrous philosophical journey full of wit and prose, their brains are fucking melted and they just stare mindlessly at dumb shit on a screen, all the best discussions and respectful debates I ever had were with coworkers at labor jobs
KNACK, noun - "readiness; habitual facility of performance; dexterity" aka frequent adaptation by free will of choice as resistance (living) within velocity (process of dying).
The more temporary growth resits ongoing loss, the more resistance grows.
people who work
Suggested work tempts one to ignore EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "internal or inherent power" aka everyone (perceiving) within everything (perceivable) represents work (energy). Ones consensual employment to the suggested work by others tempts one to ignore being temporarily employed (living) within constant work (process of dying).
There cannot be people who don't work, but others can suggest one that their are unemployed people without work.
Pandora's box is already open. barring a complete shutdown of the internet somehow, AI is here to stay and it's here to make everything gradually more retarded than it already is. people who have no idea what they're doing will make full careers out of telling an AI to do things for them, then Pikachu face when it all blows up.
Our brains rewarded predictive thought. Now it seems to be leaving us.
The fog of war is here. Give it five years until govs are using AI agents to direct the narrative and thought patterns of people.
Imagine a world where the gov uses AI to control our language. It would allow them to shape the structures of our brains and thought patterns. By controlling our environments they control us. Savor this version of the internet as long as possible.
It will get better, but it heavily depends on what you define as "better". The backbone of AI technology can only ever be derivative, never constructive. It might derive unique patterns that few people have thought of, but it will never create new paradigms.
Applied to Coding, AI will eventually get really good at implementing solutions that have already been done. It will be able to follow any coding style, adhere to any standards, and use the most efficient algorithms known. It will never, however, be able to build something truly new or innovative.
With the way tech is today, it will unseat a lot of code monkey jobs. Perhaps we've reached asymptotic diminishing returns with computer science and there just isn't much else to discover in the field and so code monkeys are inevitably going the way of the dodo.
When you want to write "AI", try to write "specific people with names and surnames who paid for training dumb system of equations in certain way". They are trying to hide behind non-existent AI, and you are helping them.
It's funny modern man thinks he's progressing forward just because of tech advances.
Mass printing of cheap books increased access information but we lost this skill for the most part of memorizing long sections like it was nothing in the past.
We also lost appreciation, and now often choose worthless dopamine hits instead.
a) consenting to artificial (opposition of natural) will kill those within natural. Why? Because it implies ones choice to ignore natural for artificial.
b) intelligence (Latin intelligo; to understand) implies ones consent to "stand under" the artificial suggestions by others, while ignoring naturally perceivable.
c) suggested "us" (plural) tempts consenting "one" (singular) to ignore self (perceiving within perceivable).
d) if there's an "us", then why are the many struggling to come together? Why do the few represent an "us" while staying apart from the many? Why are the few suggesting the many to consent to US (united states) aka the state of being united?
e) won't aka "will nothing" implies ones free "will" of choice choosing to ignore everything (perceivable) for nothing (suggested). If one will, then "won't" becomes impotent.
retard
Suggested retard (to diminish the velocity of motion) tempts one to ignore being resistance (life) within velocity of motion (inception towards death)...living cannot diminish dying, it can only resist it for the growth of resistance, hence prolonging life momentarily.
given ONE answer.
a) there's only ONE solution (inception towards death) for each ONE problem (life) within...wanting suggested answers to suggested questions tempts ONEself to ignore that.
b) what if everything (perceivable) is already given to everyone (perceiving), while each one has the free will of choice to ignore it for the suggestions of other ones?
a) to be implies temporary ascent (life) within ongoing atrophy (inception towards death) aka growth within loss.
b) to be implies different walks (life) within same way (inception towards death).
c) mind/memory "needs" to adapt to perceivable inspiration, while resisting to "want" to hold onto suggested information.
d) to remember represents RE (response to) MEMORY (memorized), which implies ignorance of perceivable input for suggested accumulation.
Example...hold your child. Remembering the birthday of your child implies your ignorance of the child you hold, hence ignoring that which is (perceivable) for that which you hold onto (suggested) about what was.
numbers
NUMBER - "the designation of a unit"; from UNIT (Latin unitas; unus) - "one". Others tempt ONE to ignore self by counting other ONEs.
Sleight of hand: Count Dracula who requires your consent to his suggestion and The Count from Sesame Street suggesting you to consent to counting...both depicting so called jews aka the "chosen ones".
Nah, hundreds of years ago people had WAY more time to just think, there were no alarm clocks, people were aligned with their natural circadian rhythm, the vast majority of work was simple labor, whether it was a man chopping wood or a woman washing the linens, human life was far more natural for our species, most people today in the first world have absolutely no clue how unnaturally complicated and hectic their lives are, it's the complete opposite of laziness being the problem, most people have hardly any time to just EXIST and not have to spend mental energy on anything for a while, when they do get those couple hours to just sit and relax, they are too mentally exhausted for some wondrous philosophical journey full of wit and prose, their brains are fucking melted and they just stare mindlessly at dumb shit on a screen, all the best discussions and respectful debates I ever had were with coworkers at labor jobs
KNACK, noun - "readiness; habitual facility of performance; dexterity" aka frequent adaptation by free will of choice as resistance (living) within velocity (process of dying).
The more temporary growth resits ongoing loss, the more resistance grows.
Suggested work tempts one to ignore EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "internal or inherent power" aka everyone (perceiving) within everything (perceivable) represents work (energy). Ones consensual employment to the suggested work by others tempts one to ignore being temporarily employed (living) within constant work (process of dying).
There cannot be people who don't work, but others can suggest one that their are unemployed people without work.
Can there be another way for life than "inception towards death"? What more than the way of life could there be and where would one be then?
No arguments here.
Pandora's box is already open. barring a complete shutdown of the internet somehow, AI is here to stay and it's here to make everything gradually more retarded than it already is. people who have no idea what they're doing will make full careers out of telling an AI to do things for them, then Pikachu face when it all blows up.
Our brains rewarded predictive thought. Now it seems to be leaving us. The fog of war is here. Give it five years until govs are using AI agents to direct the narrative and thought patterns of people.
Imagine a world where the gov uses AI to control our language. It would allow them to shape the structures of our brains and thought patterns. By controlling our environments they control us. Savor this version of the internet as long as possible.
It will get better, but it heavily depends on what you define as "better". The backbone of AI technology can only ever be derivative, never constructive. It might derive unique patterns that few people have thought of, but it will never create new paradigms.
Applied to Coding, AI will eventually get really good at implementing solutions that have already been done. It will be able to follow any coding style, adhere to any standards, and use the most efficient algorithms known. It will never, however, be able to build something truly new or innovative.
With the way tech is today, it will unseat a lot of code monkey jobs. Perhaps we've reached asymptotic diminishing returns with computer science and there just isn't much else to discover in the field and so code monkeys are inevitably going the way of the dodo.
Actually the AI design and algorithms have more development ahead of them. I'll PM you on how, but it is not good to release publically.
When you want to write "AI", try to write "specific people with names and surnames who paid for training dumb system of equations in certain way". They are trying to hide behind non-existent AI, and you are helping them.
Well said.
These people confuse data with logic all the time.
Before we had mass printing of books people like Cicero would memorize long writings and rhetorical treatises.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_loci
It's funny modern man thinks he's progressing forward just because of tech advances.
Mass printing of cheap books increased access information but we lost this skill for the most part of memorizing long sections like it was nothing in the past.
We also lost appreciation, and now often choose worthless dopamine hits instead.
a) consenting to artificial (opposition of natural) will kill those within natural. Why? Because it implies ones choice to ignore natural for artificial.
b) intelligence (Latin intelligo; to understand) implies ones consent to "stand under" the artificial suggestions by others, while ignoring naturally perceivable.
c) suggested "us" (plural) tempts consenting "one" (singular) to ignore self (perceiving within perceivable).
d) if there's an "us", then why are the many struggling to come together? Why do the few represent an "us" while staying apart from the many? Why are the few suggesting the many to consent to US (united states) aka the state of being united?
e) won't aka "will nothing" implies ones free "will" of choice choosing to ignore everything (perceivable) for nothing (suggested). If one will, then "won't" becomes impotent.
Suggested retard (to diminish the velocity of motion) tempts one to ignore being resistance (life) within velocity of motion (inception towards death)...living cannot diminish dying, it can only resist it for the growth of resistance, hence prolonging life momentarily.
a) there's only ONE solution (inception towards death) for each ONE problem (life) within...wanting suggested answers to suggested questions tempts ONEself to ignore that.
b) what if everything (perceivable) is already given to everyone (perceiving), while each one has the free will of choice to ignore it for the suggestions of other ones?
Elon's Neural-Link will complete the hijacking of the human brain.
I think our brains will atrophy in the same way that nobody has to remember phone numbers anymore thanks to cell phones.
a) to be implies temporary ascent (life) within ongoing atrophy (inception towards death) aka growth within loss.
b) to be implies different walks (life) within same way (inception towards death).
c) mind/memory "needs" to adapt to perceivable inspiration, while resisting to "want" to hold onto suggested information.
d) to remember represents RE (response to) MEMORY (memorized), which implies ignorance of perceivable input for suggested accumulation.
Example...hold your child. Remembering the birthday of your child implies your ignorance of the child you hold, hence ignoring that which is (perceivable) for that which you hold onto (suggested) about what was.
NUMBER - "the designation of a unit"; from UNIT (Latin unitas; unus) - "one". Others tempt ONE to ignore self by counting other ONEs.
Sleight of hand: Count Dracula who requires your consent to his suggestion and The Count from Sesame Street suggesting you to consent to counting...both depicting so called jews aka the "chosen ones".