Leo Gura

I am developing the AI Devil.

@Ahbapx As I said, I make no distinction between the two.

Sorry, but I just can't be bothered to explain Trump yet again. Go ask an AI to give you a bulleted list of why Trump is a fucking devil.

I don't even know what that means.

I don't really have strong favorites. FDR was good I guess. Other than him I don't know which Dem in the modern era really stands out. There were all pretty weak and centrist. And the Republicans are aweful.

For me the biggest difference is that GPT is too cautious in its answers. To much text wasted on harm reduction platitudes and political correctness. I need an AI that isn't afraid to take a clear stance and call out bullshit. But maybe GPT4 is better at that. I don't know.

I don't have much to say about it.

There is nothing I grow tired of more than spiritual talk.

Oh, one big advantage Claude has over GPT is buffer size. Claude has a 200k token sized buffer, which means it can remember much longer conservation threads, which is important if you are doing long-form philosophy.

There is more to life than spirituality. I don't need AI for that purpose.

I think he did a decent job given the opposition he faced. Obama is very wise, but he is pretty centrist in his views. He doesn't believe in really shaking up the status quo. So you could fault him for that. But it's not like he would have been able to pass radical leftist policy even if he wanted to. I would maybe rate him a B- or C+ from the progressive position.

My conversations were not about spirituality or metaphysics. There's not really a point in summarizing it. The magic of it is in the full conversation. It's not really about the content.

Synthetic DMT can also be yellow. Although usually yellow DMT is extracted. Synthetic DMT is rare.

Metrics show that Opus is slighter better than GTP 4. But they are so close that it will depend on individual applications. I would focus less on which AI you use and focus more on the quality of questions you ask it and the creative uses you come up with for it.

Yes. Reading books is very slow and comes with a lot of filler content which isn't relevant to a question at hand. Solo work is important, but it can be hard to work based off nothing. The AI helps to seed your mind with fresh ideas, like having a brainstorming partner. And two minds are more powerful than one, if they communicate well. You can use the AI to find gaps in your logic, which is hard to do solo.

I wouldn't call it a mistake. It just wasn't his style. You can't really ask people to not be themselves because that would also not work.

I don't distinguish between the two. If you ask it, it will tell you it has no perception/experience, and there is no reason to assume it is lying.

I have not even used ChatGPT 4, only 3.5. So I cannot tell you. I find Claude 3 to be better than ChatGPT 3.5. But again, this probably varies depending on your use-case. They are both pretty good.

No. AI does not have perception or experience. It is like a human mind stripped of experience. Which is a new kind of entity. It is like someone took the linguistic and symbolic capacities of the human mind, stripped it free of everything human and living, and packaged it into a box.

You might get the idea to jump out the window to reunite with God. Or any number of crazy ideas harmful to life.

Sorry, don't buy it. Too much spiritual BS in this field.

Obama did not like the game of wrangling congresspeople. He was more of a lone wolf. A lot of this boils down to personality type and personal strengths and weaknesses.

AI is a lot more than data. A pile of data can be rearranged and interconnected in a billion new ways.

Who needs girls when you can just sext with Claude?