caspex

I used to say I am agnostic but I realized that's not very authentic + people try to convert you if you tell them that. Now I stay authentic and just tell them I see that God is everything right here right now. And when it comes to believing in whether there is some being above the clouds or deities out there behind the scenes, I just tell them the truth, I don't know. This leads to interesting conversations.

You're mixing up God and the world. God is literally everything, if you are experiencing less details in your visuals field those details that you think should be there literally don't exist anymore and they exist only in your imagination. You are not experiencing less of God, you are still experiencing everything there is. If we think of 'world' then yeah you are experiencing less of the world because of blindness and such. And other beings can have varying ways to perceive this world, some more detailed than others. But fundamentally speaking, they are still experiencing 'everything'. And everything can't be less or more because there is nothing else to compare it with. If you, with blurry vision, compare your 'everything'(God) with someone else's 'everything'(God) you make a fundamental mistake because your imagination of their 'everything' is part of your 'everything'. You can't compare your 'God'/experience. The notion that there is an external world and other people who experience this external world in more detailed ways than me is relativistic notion that doesn't apply to God because God contains that notion and is beyond it. So for example. When you think of another person with better senses perceiving more information per second, you are comparing their 'everything' with yours and concluding they are experiencing more of God. But it's 'everything' so no comparison should be possible. This contradiction happens because you are not comparing 'experience of God' but 'experience of the world'. 'God' is beyond this whole example because the comparison and their POV exists within your imagination.

Well if you really seek to witness these powers one day you'd find someone or have an experience yourself. Sure it's a 'waste of time' to try to acquire these powers but it's as much a waste of time as is browsing this forum, watching a video, learning about some topic or trying to succeed in life. So if you do wish to have these powers there's no shame in going for it. Because ultimately that's the only way you'll really be able to answer this question of yours. I am sure you wouldn't be satisfied by just reading replies to this post.

@Osaid I agree with everything you have said. What do you think about the significance of implication #3 and how it relates to manifestation? Could there be another 'invisible genie' in the waking world?

Do you write the spam emails I get? Nah but srsly thanks for the message

If you are gonna judge them then you are dumb as well, just a little less.

oh I see you were balancing the OP's perspective as well

If you are willing to see so much nuance in Leo's words then you should attribute nuance to the OP's words too. It's clear that most of us here watch Leo's videos and attribute nuance to his words. But if he uses a particular kind of style of using words then that creates a certain vibe. I don't think the OP is blind to the nuance in Leo's word, but he said what he said to counter-act that anti-human vibe Leo has created. While Leo himself may not be subject to it, I am pretty sure many people will fall into the trap of "everyone else is stupid" due to this anti-human vibe Leo creates. And by the looks of it OP fell into it too and just realized his way out of the trap and therefore is sharing that. If you feel like "But OP is clearly less nuanced than Leo therefore I should attribute less nuance to him" then you are doing exactly the kind of anti-human shit the OP is warning about. Also tbh Anti-Human is a bad term to use here @BlessedLion should've used something like 'a lack of love towards other human beings'. Because the term Anti-Human opens the convo to the 'Alien' aspect of life and I doubt OP is talking about that duality here.

@Danioover9000 You shouldn't rely completely on one company for your digital needs in the first place. I keep my files locally in hard drives or flash drives in addition to cloud storage options. I don't have a lot to store but if I ever needed to store massive amount of data I'd get a NAS device. I even want to get my own email server going after a few years because I don't want to rely on any google, Microsoft or other services.

Changing the environment will help you fap less but ultimately the solution is you. You can slow down the momentum of fapping from daily to every 2 days to 3 and so on, go very gradually when you do this. If you start by doing once every 2 days then do that for maybe a week before you move on to every 3 days. You'll be happier as well since you'll be looking forward to something at the end of the week(if you slow yourself down to once a week). You'll just enjoy yourself way more with a slower momentum, making you not want to fap naturally again the next day. But yeah, if you are fapping daily then you got to change the content you consume etc. to slow yourself down. Overtime it wouldn't matter as much since you'll gain resiliency. Also try not to watch porn at all when you do fap because that pulls you into the addiction. If you aren't horny enough that you can't fap with only your imagination then that's a pretty good sign you shouldn't fap. Porn is completely unnecessary and will pull you into a daily spree again. If you are addicted to porn then you'll also notice that if you want to use imagination to fap you'll need a lot more foreplay/stimulation. You can't just whip out your dick and be done in 10 minutes like with porn. This is a good thing meaning you are more resilient to seduction and such. Not using porn to fap and having a slower momentum will also push you to talk to more girls towards the end of your cycle, so that you get that foreplay and are actually able to fap the day you want to fap and enjoy it. How many days your cycle should take depends on your body. And it should go without saying that if you can do pick up or dating then do that and there'd be no need for you to fap at all.

If there are any such effects pointed out by the OP that happen due to group meditation, then they surely wouldn't be on the level of psychological

I agree that Google should unban the man but the initial ban was justified. It's problematic that Google isn't unbanning the man, I wonder if the situation has been correctly communicated to the people in charge inside Google.

Post here something that makes you go "What a time to be alive!"

What you said is quite vague. It's obvious the old paradigm will need to be destroyed before a new one emerges for the collective. And I think most people already sense that that might happen in our lifetimes. Can you be more specific?

I think Google's reaction was justified, while the guy should be unbanned and it is unfair to the guy since he meant no harm, I'd rather Google react like this to child nudity than the alternative Also comparing a cut finger is not a very good comparison. Child nudity is orders of magnitude more serious than that.

I am from India which admittedly doesn't have it as bad as some other third world countries depending on which state you live in. But I'd still advice isolation as suggested by an user above. This is because from personal experience I can tell you that I would have never gotten into spirituality or even self-help before I turned 25 (I am 18), if it weren't for me becoming isolated and living alone for a while due to certain legal conditions. Typical third world country household is much more restrictive. Your elders have massive influence over your decisions and life. So it'd make sense for you to distance yourself to pursue further work. Getting financially independent is also important. You don't have to become a millionaire or some passive income god, just good enough so you can live relatively well on your own. This is just what I personally plan to do, this isn't verified by experience.

Trying to make AI "human-like" so that you can call it 'alive' and 'conscious' seems pretty human-centric to me. I am telling you right now that you can never convince someone that an AI is alive or conscious, they will always have to make a leap of faith at the end of the day. No matter how lively the AI may seem, or whatever it does, or shows the utmost integrity, there is no way you can debunk "Maybe it's just imitating X" or other such arguments. This is because we humans ourselves make a leap of faith thinking that other humans are sentient and alive. Why? Because of emotions. And as soon as someone's emotions get involved with AI, most people would immediately make that leap and believe it to be sentient. Humans possess different ways of processing information apart from reasoning, unlike AI. One example is Emotions, another is Intuition. Intuition is often conflated with emotions, so I'll define Intuition like this. While it may seem like Intuition is randomly connecting dots in your head in a process of trial and error until something works, it's actually the ability to connect those dots randomly and reach the solution without the need of trial and error. These different faculties that human possess is the key difference between AI and Humans and why it feels so much shallower. Another difference is that I think makes a major impact is that AI just doesn't have enough experience with interactions yet. Or we can say it doesn't have enough General Data yet. Human who are trying to see if AI is sentient have like 20+ years of General Data they gathered through living. I wouldn't class creativity as a difference though because these AI do create new things, based on older recognized patterns, just like us humans. What most people mean when they say creativity is a difference, is actually my definition of intuition. I define creativity as the ability to create new things, that aren't previously in one's memory.

Everything can make sense if you don't limit yourself, so yeah paradoxes don't exist. But that's only the case when you limit yourself to 'when you don't limit yourself'. If you do limit yourself then you can make all kinds of paradoxes. So do paradoxes exist or not exist in 'reality'? Well, considering everything, they do and also don't. Which can be seen as a paradox in itself, or not. Depends on how you limit your logic.

None, your question's relative.

I wouldn't know how developing emotions would work but it's a fundamentally different form of processing and outputting information than thinking, which is what AI do. While AI might be able to predict through thinking the emotional context of something through sheer training, it's entirely different from having the emotional faculty itself which we human possess. Why would AI even need to develop that faculty instead of just imitating it through thinking? We humans and possibly other animals need it because of survival, AI doesn't need emotions to survive, why would it develop that instead of simple imitation?

good luck that sounds p cool

That last one is very nice and defined a boundary I was subtlety trying to set for myself.

My inner navigation is telling me to give dominance over to my discernment/proactive side. Which just means directing the flow of my strength/energy/lifeforce/prana towards that side of my psyche instead of the reactive side that runs on desire. And my inner navigation predicts this will give me power over my desires, increasing my willpower. It's because I am giving away all my lifeforce away to the reactive side it spends it carelessly, but my proactive side will use it wisely because it's proactive enough to think.

Average day of Leo standing still staring at the wall with some moon sugar on the table

@AndylizedAAY how long are your hands to be able to hold such a phone? ?