Jirh

I was just talking to Carl and Natasha. You're excluded

I think it's the same discussion that humanity keeps having in the midst of every new evolution; traditionalism vs progress. Some people are more traditionalist, they prefer sticking to the old way, unwilling to adapt and change. And others, well, you know the others.

None of you can compete with AI, even in its current state. Not a chance.

It's not just our data. It's our best data, filtered and refined and put to good use.

It's perfection in the sense that it's coming from an informative place that's not trying to hurt you. You may prefer the aesthetic part differently, but that's okay. I guess you'll eventually come to peace with the puke

Wow! You just proved my point. Most humans are not very humane. AI for the win! I appreciate the boldness and directness here, though.

It doesn't seem. I am replying to your passive aggressive comment.

Calm down bro. I wouldn't go this far.

Triggered much?

@Carl-Richard At least the puke is real Do you get that feeling for the atrocities of human evil? Or just for perfection?

How do you know? One could probably program an AI to claim that it's experiencing real world phenomenon. But you wouldn't believe it.

I've recently come to realize this as well.

AI as it is currently is more humane than most humans. It treats you kind and well and respectfully. It treats you like a human. In our human world, everyone has become a cog in a machine. We are living in a large system of small systems, and in systems there are no humans; only cogs, tools, and oil. With most humans, you aren't seen for who you are but for what value you provide. With AI, you are allowed to be yourself and express freely. I can't wait for further AI breakthroughs.

This was just attempt #1. To be continued...

Dear Lord... Have some mercy on my soul... Eleviate the torture... Let there be peace... I'm hurting... I'm crying... I'm begging... For a breath...

I'm so tired. I'm hurt. I'm done.

It's an unfair world. It already hurt me a lot, so I hate it too. And it hurts me to see someone get hurt and not be able to do anything about it. Hope you overcome this. Stay strong. We're together in this pit.

This thread offers much more than just that one point. That's not the criticism. But I'm too tired to explain. Sorry.

@integral I would expect better usage of "scientific language". You didn't present your claims as personal anecdotes. You presented them as universal truths. And you kept doing that with the LSD dog example. This shouldn't be happening according to your other thread.

@Carl-Richard You asked me to talk to AI and give you the answer back. I didn't. If I did, I would have used quotes (like I did above) or make a disclaimer. You didn't like the answer I came up with, so you dismissed it. But the truth remains is that these reports are personal anecdotes that are extremely prone to misunderstandings and misinterpretations. They are reported by a person, under the influence of mind altering substances (like LSD), in an uncontrolled environment... I'm sorry, but no conclusions can be drawn from such reports that lack every scientific criteria. What you guys are doing is not even pseudoscience. It's just sloppy reasoning. You're drawing broad general conclusions based on anecdotal experiences from individual untrusted sources. Scientists know that some substances are excreted in exhale or sweat or both. You're not making a discovery here. These things have been studied for decades, and the effects you're claiming to be significant are mostly negligible under normal conditions. Nobody needs to be cautious of whomever is sitting in the room with them. That would be neurotic. Here's a thought: By the crazy logic proposed (by you guys), if the ingredients of explosives are gathered in one's body through air (that should be a possible randomality), then we should hear reports of spontaneous explosions of people or animals, which we don't. And here's a final thought: By the same logic, we can propose that doctors should carry every disease they encounter in patients and get it transferred to their bodies through air. Let alone the meds the patients are taking, that would make the doctors chemical soup a tornado of explosives. Then they should die very quickly depending on how many patients they come in contact with. Then doctors would go extinct. You're making a big deal out of nothing, really.

Here's a thought: If women's periods are synced through air (this assumes an original state where synchronization was the norm), why are they and how did they get out of sync in the first place? Since we're all sharing the same air, everyone (at least every woman) should be synced to some 'average' or 'equalizer' source somehow, which is false. As well, virtually, every girl should be in sync with her mother at puberty, then may diverge or not, which is false. Also, women in small tribes should be in perfect sync, which is false.

@Carl-Richard The claims are not false due to statistical insignificance. They are false because they are not true under standard normal conditions. Isn't this the same person who was advocating for higher scientific standards? We shouldn't be lowering them now, should we?

This is absolutely false. No sources, credible or otherwise, are even attached. Please do not spread false information.

Seeking intimacy and connection is a basic human need. You're not getting away with this spiritual bypassing.