Why humans can't get rid of their egos ?

[Atla]

My hypotheses almost always turn out to be correct. But tell me why you think I would waste my time by proving things to you?

"Almost always" is not good enough in this game. If I know how confirmation bias works (and I do). I am in control over your conclusions.

But tell me why you think I would waste my time by proving things to you?

Because you aren't proving anything to me. You are proving it to yourself.

And I am telling you - you've made a mistake. Your mistake is you lacking an alternative hypothesis...

Again shows what you know, about you I've considered like 10-20 different hypotheses.

And why is "almost always" not good enough when "always" isn't even possible. You control nothing here.

[Logik]

Again shows what you know, about you I've considered like 10-20 different hypotheses.

You can consider 2 or 2000000 hypotheses. If the True hypothesis is not in your set of 2000000, you are still screwed.

And why is "almost always" not good enough when "always" isn't even possible. You control nothing here.

If you aren't testing for the True hypothesis - I am in control of how you interpret the evidence.
Because I know something you don't - my intentions

Why? The answer is in this book: https://www.amazon.com/Probability-Theo ... 0521592712

Information asymmetry is a bitch. What I DO control is the flow of information.

[Atla]

Again shows what you know, about you I've considered like 10-20 different hypotheses.

You can consider 2 or 2000000 hypotheses. If the True hypothesis is not in your set of 2000000, you are still screwed.

And why is "almost always" not good enough when "always" isn't even possible. You control nothing here.

If you aren't testing for the True hypothesis - I am in control of how you interpret the evidence.
Because I know something you don't - my intentions

Why? The answer is in this book: https://www.amazon.com/Probability-Theo ... 0521592712

Information asymmetry is a bitch. What I DO control is the flow of information.

There often isn't a 100% true hypothesis in psychology, genius. And I don't care about your intentions. No idea what you mean with this control thing either, but you are not as omnipotent as you think. Plus I know more about information than you. Enjoy

[Logik]

There often isn't a 100% true hypothesis in psychology, genius.

I am well aware of that, genius. Your decision-space is 5000 or so psychological hypotheses (if you even considered the extend of the body of knowledge present in the field). Which makes for about 12-13 bits of information.

With 8 billion people on the planet that's a tad over-subscribed, don't you think ?

Never mind that - you admitted that you've considered 20-30 hypotheses in total.

So we are actually talking about 6 bits not 13

And I don't care about your intentions. No idea what you mean with this control thing either, but you are not as omnipotent as you think. Plus I know more about information than you.

Omnipotent? ROFL.

Manipulating 6 bits to fuck with your inference engine is child's play.

In cryptography we fuck with 256 bits and more and we still get it right....

[Atla]

There often isn't a 100% true hypothesis in psychology, genius.

I am well aware of that, genius. Your decision-space is 5000 or so psychological hypotheses (if you even considered the extend of the body of knowledge present in the field). Which makes for about 12-13 bits of information.

With 8 billion people on the planet that's a tad over-subscribed, don't you think ?

Never mind that - you admitted that you've considered 20-30 hypotheses in total.

So we are actually talking about 6 bits not 13

And I don't care about your intentions. No idea what you mean with this control thing either, but you are not as omnipotent as you think. Plus I know more about information than you.

Omnipotent? ROFL.

Manipulating 6 bits to fuck with your inference engine is child's play.

Which proves that you don't even know what bits are. Bit embarrassing for a tech genius isn't it.

[Logik]

Which proves that you don't even know what bits are. Bit embarrassing for a tech genius isn't it.

Yeah. Teach me. I'll just listen now.

Idiot. You are so far out of your depth....

[Age]

...

Just one example out of dozens

The so called 'infinite loop through Itself' can be very easily explained....

There are NO infinity loops.....

Seriously what the fuck is wrong with you?

Can your brain even process context ?

In some contexts there are infinite loops.
In some contexts there are no infinite loops.

All you have to figure out is which context you are in....

You would NOT yet be aware but I wrote that EXACTLY how it is. Waiting for someone to propose that that is a contradiction or some other thing.

When, and if, any one wants to give a go at pointing out any thing that they think is wrong here, then we will have some thing to look at and discuss.

[Logik]

Just one example out of dozens





Seriously what the fuck is wrong with you?

Can your brain even process context ?

In some contexts there are infinite loops.
In some contexts there are no infinite loops.

All you have to figure out is which context you are in....

You would NOT yet be aware but I wrote that EXACTLY how it is. Waiting for someone to propose that that is a contradiction or some other thing.

When, and if, any one wants to give a go at pointing out any thing that they think is wrong here, then we will have some thing to look at and discuss.

This is an automated response.

The owner of this accounts has put you on their ignore list.
Please deposit 1 BTC to the following account to request an unban: 371tHcXY1yHdEZU1YTLnhkVQYpTU2mDZNs

[Age]

...

Just one example out of dozens

The so called 'infinite loop through Itself' can be very easily explained, if one is Truly curious to understand how It works.

From my view, the 'infinite loop process' is far more pretty and illuminating that human beings could even imagine, at the moment, when this is written.

I would LOVE to hear, and SEE, YOUR view of things. It sounds like we might have completely opposing VIEWS on the exact SAME 'infinite loop' of things.

There are NO infinity loops. Why you would THINK I come up with some thing like that?

Seriously what the fuck is wrong with you?

I don't have to spend a year of my life sitting here all day writing 20-page long responses to a mentally ill schizophrenic fucktard who is trying to convince us that his delusions are real and everyone else is an idiot.

I did NOT see this post earlier.

This is the only example that you have ever provided and I had to write this to get you to just provide ONE example.

If you LOOK AT what I actually WROTE there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with it.

Unless of course you can SHOW otherwise.

But to do that you would have to EXPLAIN what you SEE is WRONG with what I wrote.

[Age]

Can your brain even process context ?

In some contexts there are infinite loops.
In some contexts there are no infinite loops.

All you have to figure out is which context you are in....

You would NOT yet be aware but I wrote that EXACTLY how it is. Waiting for someone to propose that that is a contradiction or some other thing.

When, and if, any one wants to give a go at pointing out any thing that they think is wrong here, then we will have some thing to look at and discuss.

This is an automated response.

The owner of this accounts has put you on their ignore list.
Please deposit 1 BTC to the following account to request an unban: 371tHcXY1yHdEZU1YTLnhkVQYpTU2mDZNs

You are aware right that if you HAD put me on the ignore list already, which this would be the third time you said you have, then you would NOT have received this?

[Logik]

You would NOT yet be aware but I wrote that EXACTLY how it is. Waiting for someone to propose that that is a contradiction or some other thing.

When, and if, any one wants to give a go at pointing out any thing that they think is wrong here, then we will have some thing to look at and discuss.

This is an automated response.

The owner of this accounts has put you on their ignore list.
Please deposit 1 BTC to the following account to request an unban: 371tHcXY1yHdEZU1YTLnhkVQYpTU2mDZNs

You are aware right that if you HAD put me on the ignore list already, which this would be the third time you said you have, then you would NOT have received this?

This is an automated response.

The owner of this accounts has put you on their ignore list.
Please deposit 1 BTC to the following account to request an unban: 371tHcXY1yHdEZU1YTLnhkVQYpTU2mDZNs

[Eodnhoj7]

You would NOT yet be aware but I wrote that EXACTLY how it is. Waiting for someone to propose that that is a contradiction or some other thing.

When, and if, any one wants to give a go at pointing out any thing that they think is wrong here, then we will have some thing to look at and discuss.

This is an automated response.

The owner of this accounts has put you on their ignore list.
Please deposit 1 BTC to the following account to request an unban: 371tHcXY1yHdEZU1YTLnhkVQYpTU2mDZNs

You are aware right that if you HAD put me on the ignore list already, which this would be the third time you said you have, then you would NOT have received this?

He is freaking out because he is realizing noone is buying his stance and the "philosophy" he seeks to destroy cannot be programmed into a computer.

Expect him to become more aggressive and then fake being cool.

Philosophy cannot be programmed, as "quality" or "meaning" cannot be programmed.

Keep in mind he created a new account, after claiming he forgot which email he used to log in as...he is a computer programmer.



I am just going to run him into the ground and see how far his intelligence and endurance goes...such is the fate of sophists.

[Lacewing]

WHY is it when I put questions to people about their views they inevitably give up and want to leave?

Maybe because it appears that you're spinning in your own head, and people don't want to spin there with you. You seem to miss, distort, and falsely deny too much to hash through. It's not up to other people to continually point out the inconsistencies in what you say. It's neither fun or interesting after awhile.

Communication doesn't have to be hard. People who hide behind their own convoluted distortions of words and meanings and applications--as if it's some sort of profound knowledge or reasoning--typically seem to be trying to maintain/nurture some self-indulgent delusions. It's their game... it's often all about them... and a lot of people don't want to play.

[Lacewing]

Yeah whatever we come up with, it's done with a human mind. On the other hand, I do actually base my guess on infinite possibility, or rather an infinite "multiversal" field. I've been trying to simulate in my head for like a decade now, how some parts of a world of infinite possibility would necessarily sort of loop through themselves and be themselves at the same time, what such loops would be like and what their relative probabilites would be (in case probabilities within the infinite work the way I think they do). Still a work in progress.

It's a guess based on everything I know. It leads to a pretty dark and depressing picture about our world, which is why I would never publish this in detail, and would never ever mention certain implications of it.

But any "implications" of infinite possibility would somehow falsely be based on a "collection" of ideas/limitations -- wouldn't they? Because there isn't a specific picture to settle on. It's all movement. It might seem dark to a human, if that human is intent on some kind of linear and solid meaning/value. But if a human could be part of a wave that folds back into that which is greater, and for no specific reason (like all of nature), it's possibly all just the rising and falling of experience. An endless ocean of waves and movement?

Maybe only a LACK of movement brings about that which seems dark and depressing. Being static, fixed, closed, stagnant -- which is built on non-infinite ideas/energy?

[Atla]

Yeah whatever we come up with, it's done with a human mind. On the other hand, I do actually base my guess on infinite possibility, or rather an infinite "multiversal" field. I've been trying to simulate in my head for like a decade now, how some parts of a world of infinite possibility would necessarily sort of loop through themselves and be themselves at the same time, what such loops would be like and what their relative probabilites would be (in case probabilities within the infinite work the way I think they do). Still a work in progress.

It's a guess based on everything I know. It leads to a pretty dark and depressing picture about our world, which is why I would never publish this in detail, and would never ever mention certain implications of it.

But any "implications" of infinite possibility would somehow falsely be based on a "collection" of ideas/limitations -- wouldn't they? Because there isn't a specific picture to settle on. It's all movement. It might seem dark to a human, if that human is intent on some kind of linear and solid meaning/value. But if a human could be part of a wave that folds back into that which is greater, and for no specific reason (like all of nature), it's possibly all just the rising and falling of experience. An endless ocean of waves and movement?

Maybe only a LACK of movement brings about that which seems dark and depressing. Being static, fixed, closed, stagnant -- which is built on non-infinite ideas/energy?

Well I did settle on a specific picture which is an infinite multiversal field (as I think that is the most probable guess). It's a form of multiverse idea, extrapolated from our universe. I always look for what I think is the most probably guess (because I don't think a human can do more), but of course I can easily be wrong at every point.

I usually imagine it as a superposition of non-existence, one particle, two particles, three particles, four particles and so on up to infinity. Somewhere in that infinite mess there is also our own universe (it occurs infinitely many times actually).

I try to think in 5-7 "dimensions" depending on how we count, how parts of this infinite mess loop through themselves. And then some parts of that loop again, and so on again up to infinity.

What is really depressing about my models is that we automatically assume that humanity has a future, which unfortunately might be highly unlikely..