aurum

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    3,670

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by aurum

  1. Posted

    5 hours ago, integral said:

    Taking a supplement for a few days you can tell by listing to you body if its healthy or not for you.

    No you cannot. You can only tell the most gross, obvious effects. More subtle effects will completely allude you.

    The reality for 99.9% people is they have no idea whether the supplements they are taking are doing what they intend for them to do. The natural feedback system of the body that you can tune into by “listening” is not robust enough. Unless you are a Vipassana interoceptive master or extremely gifted psychic, your intuition is not that strong. And even for these people I would have doubts.

    To know what effects supplements are having on your body requires not just listening, but rigorous testing. Listening to how you feel is just one piece of data among many other potential pieces of data. It by itself is often incomplete.

    5 hours ago, integral said:

    I find it hard to believe he can take all of them all at the same time and that works for his body. 

    Maybe. But the point is to use data to sift through these sort of hunches. This is the essence of science. Wellness is too complex for any one human to fully understand.

    5 hours ago, integral said:

    The point I was making is by taking all does supplements and medication and doing everything all at the same time he cant tell what each one does in isolation.

    I understand the point. Obviously they don’t have perfect information and could be making errors, even serious errors. 

    But consider the alternative, which is that it only seems impossible from your POV because you lack the level of data, testing and experts on staff that he has. 

  2. Posted

    1 hour ago, integral said:

    Parts of what hes doing id definitely try like optimizing diet, sleep, exercise and stress with the aid of bio feedback/clinical testing but other parts ive already tried and it doesn't work out so simply. 

    Well obviously.

    The whole point of what he is doing is that everything must be rigorously tested. You cannot just copy-paste his exact supplements and meal plan. This kind of thinking is exactly what Blueprint is meant to correct.

    1 hour ago, integral said:

    So if he suddenly has a heart attack tomorrow you'll have a complete brain fuck recontextualization of the situation. you'll question everything he was doing. Ive had that brain fuck observing people so im just being skeptical.

     

    Granted that it’s possible his health could be a house of cards. But a heart attack or a

    similar situation is highly unlikely given how well-monitored his health situation.

    Heart attacks generally do not just happen out of the blue. They are the result of years of slow atherosclerosis. They only seem out of the blue for most people because we are not nearly as well-monitored as him. 

    If he was actually on the verge of a heart attack, his team would more than likely know. They already caught one timebomb with his jugular vein stenosis.

    1 hour ago, integral said:

    you feel worse yet on paper it looks better! In his case hes doing so many things all at the same time that there is no telling what parts of it are good or bad.

    That’s why he has 30+ doctors.

    They certainly have some idea what is good or bad. It’s not completely flying blind, even if it’s not perfect.

    In his case, his paperwork is better and he feels better. So your point does not really hold.

    31 minutes ago, Michael569 said:

    This would have matched my assumption on what a longevity diet looks like (outside of the supplements and powders)

    Any thoughts on whether his caloric restriction is sustainable?

    In my personal experiments with caloric restriction, I hit a wall eventually. It seems he is only able to maintain it through supplements and TRT.

  3. Posted

    @CARDOZZO I posted about this awhile back as well.

    I am skeptical of some of his specific tactics. For instance, I question whether he will be able to maintain the calorie deficit he is on for the rest of his life, his use of TRT + Metformin + Rapamycin, as well as the sheer cost time / energy 

    However, I am starting consider that data-driven wellness may be the future. It may be the solution to so many debates about health.

    The reality is that poor health is mostly only a lack of one thing: proper feedback. With enough correct feedback, almost all your health problems would be solved. And that’s really what Bryan is doing. Bryan is getting more feedback about his health than any other human.

    What if we all could get a similar level of feedback? What if I could step on a device first thing in the morning that read the complete health of all my organs, and then had an AI analyze it for problems before sending it to my doctor? Would you not want that? I would.

    Obviously there is still a lot of questions and discussion. to be had here. But it is extremely interesting to me.

     

  4. Posted

    @FourCrossedWands

    I wear them regularly and really enjoy how they feel. I’ll wear normal shoes when I need to, but I find going back to normal shoes for too long starts giving me random aches and pains.

    The theory is that modern shoes basically ruin your gait possibly the foot’s natural arch. Orthotics might offer temporary relief in some cases, but may also compound the problem by supplementing for an arch in the foot.

    I’d say experiment and see how they feel to you. 

    If you are going to try them, it is recommended that you go slow. Your feet have adapted to walking a certain way, and going barefoot forces new adaptations. You don’t want to push that process too fast.

  7. Posted

    3 hours ago, Hardkill said:

    I agree with that, but just to play Devil’s advocate, what about the argument made by the right-wing in America, which is that “if want to improve whatever situation you’re in, then don’t depend on the government to save you. If you want to improve your standard of living and/or improve your level of education, or have the opportunity to focus on higher conscious pursuits, then  it’s your responsibility to achieve those things yourself. You have to power to do all yourself and by asking for the right help from those in private sector.”

    Stupidity.

    There is nothing that functions in modern society without the government. Even your ability to take personal responsibility for your life requires a highly effective State. 

    This idea that you shouldn’t depend on the public sector is both impossible and hypocritical. Right-wingers depend on the government every second of their life.

    Of course, there is a limit. You cannot and should not depend on the government for everything. Some balance must be struck. But a lot of right-wingers are in denial of how badly we need government. 

  8. Posted

    On 4/28/2023 at 10:45 PM, Hardkill said:

    That's why it kinda makes me wonder sometimes if there is any need or urgency for anymore liberal or progressive economic policies for those who are not wealthy. 

    Do you think that the growing economic equality in the US needs to be fixed?

    There is a need for progressive economics policies. Progressives are correct that the middle class is getting hallowed out. This is not healthy for the overall system. Too much wealth polarization creates absurdities and instability.

    That said, I don’t think a socialist utopia where everyone is completely financially equal is a worth while goal. Some degree of wealth inequality is going to be inevitable and probably beneficial.

    What we should be concerned with is:

    1) Raising the overall standards of living

    2) Raising people’s economic ability to pursue higher consciousness pursuits

    3) Constantly maintaining balance in the system so the distribution of wealth doesn’t polarize too much to either extreme (inequality or equality)

  9. Posted

    Both lens are correct, and they’re both incomplete.

    Yes, we have a degree of individual autonomy in our lives. And, we also are massively influenced by our environment, upbringing, etc.

    The problem I see is when people get dogmatic about either of these perspectives.

    In America, you actually do have quite a lot of individual autonomy to shape your destiny relative to other parts of the world. But at the same time there is also corruption and racism and trauma and geography and general rigging of the system.

    So everyone’s situation will be different. The question for me is whether or not your perspective is adaptive or maladaptive to the situation you are in.

  10. Posted

    11 hours ago, M A J I said:

    Hue-mans are naturally Immortal and breatharian but we now live in environments completely artificial and un-natural thus age and decay because of polluted air, food, water supply and radiation, electronics, stress ect..

    No.

    I am not saying our environment is not polluted with toxics to some degree. It definitely is. But the situation is not nearly as bad as you are making it out to be.

    Immortality is not natural at all. It is highly unnatural to how all species have evolved. To achieve physical immortality would require something beyond what is considered natural. Cleaning up the environment is grossly insufficient for immortality.

    As far as breatharianism, I don’t deny that such a thing could be possible. There are people like Ray Maor who may have an ability to eat very little food. But that does not mean it’s optimal for anti-aging, or that you will be able to do the same, even with a clean environment and training.

  12. Posted

    I just came across this video of Bryan Johnson, current world record-holder in the anti-aging community and millionaire CEO.

    I thought a discussion of his protocol and the future of health & wellness would be fun.

    What are the collective pros of what Bryan is doing? What are the downsides? And how does it relate to the themes of Actualized.org?

    Here is a quick list that I came up with:

     

    Possible Pros

    1. Data driven health & wellness can disrupt biased, human opinionated health & wellness. No longer do we have to debate about whether vegan or carnivore is superior. As technology improves, we can have access to real-time data about our health like never before. Everything can be tested and measured for effectiveness. This was not possible without modern technology, which is why no one has ever done it. We are entering a new golden age of biofeedback.

    2. Bryan is helping to change our collective beliefs about aging and rejuvenation. What was once inevitable effects of aging may no longer be the case.

    3. Bryan is providing his protocols to the general public, therefore helping to increase public health. Healthier people are more likely to seek out self-actualized and be interested in Tier 2 values & needs

    4. We are being shown the power of team-based health and wellness. Most people try to solve their health problems either by themselves or with just a few professionals. What happens when someone has an entire team dedicated to their wellness? What if everyone had accessed to such a team, or at least close to it?

    5. Mental health benefits seem to be correlated for Bryan with this protocol. So this is about more than the physical body, it's about happiness

     

    Possible Critiques

    1. We are becoming obsessed with data and losing our natural intuition about our own bodies. What ever happened to eat when hungry, sleep when tired, drink when thirsty? Why are we making health so complicated?

    2. Bryan is only able to accomplish what he is doing because he has accrued vast financial resources that 99.9% of people never will

    3. What is the purpose of anti-aging or health & wellness if it takes this much effort to accomplish? Is this level of health even functionally necessary? Might we be better off spending less time on our health and more time actually living our life?

    4. This is advanced survival, which ultimately is a distraction from deeper spiritual contemplation and pursuits

    5. This promotes surrendering your own authority around your health to experts, science and research which may be flawed

     

    Thoughts?

  14. Posted

    5 hours ago, OBEler said:

    I cured my weak eyesight (which was caused by weak eye muscles, which was caused by an energy problem) with a handful of  5 meo low dose (about 15 times) . 

    Can you say more about this?

    Currently also experiencing some vision issues and have been curious if psychedelics can help. My thinking is that the eyes and brain are so deeply connected that there may be some healing potential there. But I’ve seen almost no research or even anecdotes about this so far.

  17. Posted

    @Husseinisdoingfine realistically, you will not succeed at not feeling FOMO.

    It’s human nature to compare ourselves to others. You would need far more maturity, wisdom and perspective to truly no longer care about your friend’s success. You’re not in a place where that’s real for you.

    What’s real for you is that having a fun college experience and getting into a good university is very important. And your friend’s success is rubbing salt in the wound.

    That’s fine. Justified or not, that’s where you are at. And so I wouldn’t try to not feel how you feel.

    Instead, ask yourself: how is this contributing to my sense of self-awareness of what I want? What is my jealousy pointing me to that’s real? And how can I move in the direction of that?

  18. Posted

    17 hours ago, Hardkill said:

    So, does that mean that most young liberals in the US will become conservative and therefore end up voting for Republicans by the time they around 45 years or older?

    It doesn’t work like that in my experience.

    It’s more accurate to say that young liberals today will continue to vote for similar policies when they are 45 that they believe in currently. They are not suddenly going to become Republicans in the way we think about Republicans right now.

  19. Posted

    14 minutes ago, Thought Art said:

    @sleep Maybe, or it can make it worse. You need a stable mind and foundation before you go super deep. It destabilizes stables minds to begin with. 
     

    Your healing process can be a spiritual one, and maybe it should be. But, you don’t need the highest realizations right now I think. You have your whole life ahead of you. 

    @sleep I'm going to second this.

    Sure, spiritual work could help with your healing. There is a correlation there. But you don't need the deepest level of awakenings to get off psychiatric treatment. And in fact it could backfire badly on you.

    Your mood issues are likely far more basic. Things like nutrition, mindfulness, bodywork, sauna, exercise, breathwork, sauna, cold showers, sunlight, friends + community, a meaningful career, etc.

    If you want a spiritual practice, you could look into Vipassana meditation. But be careful about biting off more than you can chew. 

  20. Posted

    13 hours ago, zurew said:

    Some people at OpenAI have already suggested 1 thing how this can be achieved: Pause the development for a while and try to recreate the current AI but with now using different methods (so trying to create AIs with similar capability, but using different pathyways). This way the developers will be able to understand why things work the way they do right now.

    I’m not against a pause if developers really think it will make a difference.

    However, I question whether or not a pause is politically / economically feasible to enact. You have to actually be able to enforce such a decision not only domestically but internationally.

    In theory, we could just “pause” nuclear weapons. But in reality that doesn’t work either. We keep building them as well.

    Second question: will we be able to solve these problems in six months? Will we be confident enough at that point to say a future AGI won’t eat us alive? How will we know? What test can be run? 

     

  22. Posted

    13 hours ago, zurew said:

    Once we are at a place, where we actually need to monitor for psychopatic AIs we are already fucked. Its one thing to monitor for terrorist threats that are coming from humans, its another thing to prepare for an intelligence that is totally  alien to us , that could invent 1000 novel and new ways  to execute certain plans; power seeking behaviour and hide its intentions etc.

    It will be able to play 20d chess, and we will be already under that psychopatic AI's control before we would realize it.

    I disagree.

    It’s going to take time for anyone to build and train a superhuman, psychopathic AI. It’s possible the FBI and other law enforcement agencies could stop it before that was completed. Especially if the authorities themselves are using an already functional AI.

    What I outlined is preventative. It wasn’t meant to be a solution to stop an already existing, rampaging AI.

    13 hours ago, zurew said:

    The answer is to actually try to understand much better whats going on inside the blackbox. Until that happens we are just playing with fire, because we have no idea what we are building and how that thing is going to behave.

     

    So what is your solution?

    If you are suggesting pausing or shutting down AI, how would you accomplish that?

    16 hours ago, Dryas said:

    Why not?

    Because all it shows is that AI will likely be interested in survival / self-preservation / goal preservation.

    IMO it’s possible for AI to have all those things and not seek to wipe out humanity.

  23. Posted

    8 hours ago, Dryas said:

    You're trying to outsmart superintelligence here. It wont work.

    @aurum

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEUO6pjwFOo

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeecOKBus3Q

    I think he could have explained these but it probably would have taken too long.

    I checked out both videos. Neither one reasonably proves the point of the Time article.

  24. Posted

    55 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

    @aurum Those are all good ideas domestically, but how do you handle foreign state actors?

    Foreign state is harder. To the degree the US can’t play world police, it would have to rely on each countries own internal version of these resources.

    Given that a sufficiently powerful / psychopathic AI could pose an threat to global security, this is also a good case for more global unification. We need international organizations that can coordinate easily on handling these things.

    For now, I think we have some good natural barriers to entry working in our favor. The countries that have the least capacity to monitor a psychopathic AI are the same countries that will struggle to create one. And the countries that have the best capacity to build that AI also have the best capacity to monitor it. That knife cuts both ways.

    But that barrier to entry won’t last forever, the same way the nuclear bomb barrier to entry didn’t last forever. So there may be outliers that need to be accounted for. We don’t want an undeveloped country getting a hold of tech it really shouldn’t have and can’t control.

  25. Posted

    15 hours ago, Jwayne said:

    The USA military - with hundreds of bases spread around the earth and non-stop history of imperialist intervention - is objectively a far greater risk than the Russian military (as heinous as it may be).

    The point is the AI could be used for nefarious means and we are talking about preventing such things. Russia is just an example.

    15 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

    It must be possible to create an autonomous psychopathic intelligence. How do you prevent that?

    Let’s assume that’s possible, and that people exist who have both the motivation and capacity to do so.

    One piece of the solution could be turning this over to the FBI / CIA. We already have teams at these places that monitor for potential terrorist threats, coups, nuclear weapons building, political assassination attempts, etc. Building a psychopathic AI would need to be added to that list.

    In the future, there may be raids on AI learning labs in the same way there are raids on drug labs.

    Also, anyone seeking to build an AI should not automatically be fear and clear to do so. There need to be permits, inspections, licenses beyond simple Intellectual Property laws. Similar to how we treat building a physical building.

    Ironically we may be able to use an obedient AI to monitor for potential rogue, psychopathic AIs.

    If someone is truly determined to build a dangerous AI, they may be able to skirt these safeguards. Terrorists still succeed on rare occasion. But this would be a good start.